Search

Low back pain and depression have been globally recognized as key public health problems and they are considered co-morbid conditions. This study explores both cross-sectional and longitudinal comorbid associations between back pain and major depression in the adult population in the United States. We used data from the Midlife in the United States survey (MIDUS), linking MIDUS II and III with a sample size of 2358. Logistic regression and Poisson regression models were used. The cross-sectional analysis showed significant associations between back pain and major depression. The longitudinal analysis indicated that back pain at baseline was prospectively associated with major depression at follow-up (PR 1.96, CI: 1.41, 2.74), controlling for health behavioral and demographic variables. Major depression at baseline was also prospectively associated with back pain at follow-up (PR 1.48, CI: 1.04, 2.13), controlling for a set of related confounders. These findings of a bidirectional comorbid association fill a gap in the current understanding of these comorbid conditions and could have clinical implications for the management and prevention of both depression and low back pain.

In this paper we pay homage to Dr Alan H. Adams, who was born on November 3, 1945, and passed away on December 26, 2020. An early adopter of problem-based learning and evidence-based medicine, he contributed substantially to improving chiropractic education, research, and developing an evidence-based practice mindset for chiropractic practice. People who knew Al best recall that he was a fluent instigator of collaborative relationships, and he inspired and advanced many people in their academic and scientific careers. His curiosity, expertise, and mentorship were appreciated by many people and developed numerous interprofessional collaborations.

Objective The purpose of this article is to discuss a literature review—a recent systematic review of nonmusculoskeletal disorders—that demonstrates the potential for faulty conclusions and misguided policy implications, and to offer an alternate interpretation of the data using present models and criteria. Methods We participated in a chiropractic meeting (Global Summit) that aimed to perform a systematic review of the literature on the efficacy and effectiveness of mobilization or spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) for the primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention and treatment of nonmusculoskeletal disorders. After considering an early draft of the resulting manuscript, we identified points of concern and therefore declined authorship. The present article was developed to describe those concerns about the review and its conclusions. Results Three main concerns were identified: the inherent limitations of a systematic review of 6 articles on the topic of SMT for nonmusculoskeletal disorders, the lack of biological plausibility of collapsing 5 different disorders into a single category, and considerations for best practices when using evidence in policy-making. We propose that the following conclusion is more consistent with a review of the 6 articles. The small cadre of high- or moderate-quality randomized controlled trials reviewed in this study found either no or equivocal effects from SMT as a stand-alone treatment for infantile colic, childhood asthma, hypertension, primary dysmenorrhea, or migraine, and found no or low-quality evidence available to support other nonmusculoskeletal conditions. Therefore, further research is needed to determine if SMT may have an effect in these and other nonmusculoskeletal conditions. Until the results of such research are available, the benefits of SMT for specific or general nonmusculoskeletal disorders should not be promoted as having strong supportive evidence. Further, a lack of evidence cannot be interpreted as counterevidence, nor used as evidence of falsification or verification. Conclusion Based on the available evidence, some statements generated from the Summit were extrapolated beyond the data, have the potential to misrepresent the literature, and should be used with caution. Given that none of the trials included in the literature review were definitively negative, the current evidence suggests that more research on nonmusculoskeletal conditions is warranted before any definitive conclusions can be made. Governments, insurers, payers, regulators, educators, and clinicians should avoid using systematic reviews in decisions where the research is insufficient to determine the clinical appropriateness of specific care.

Introduction Several studies have indicated high cholesterol is paradoxically associated with low prevalence of atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF). However, the etiology is uncertain. One potential explanation might be the confounding effect of age exemplifying prevalence-incidence (Neyman's) bias. However, this bias has not often been discussed in depth in the literature. Therefore, we conducted a cross-sectional analysis to test the hypothesis that there is a paradoxical association between lipid profile and AF prevalence. Methods This is a cross-sectional study design, using data from the Kuakini Honolulu Heart Program. Participants were 3741 Japanese-American men between 71 and 93 years old living in Hawaii. Serum total cholesterol (TC) level was measured and categorized into quartiles. AF was diagnosed by 12‑lead Electrocardiogram. We categorized age into quartiles (71–74, 75–77, 78–80 and 81+ years). Results We observed opposite associations between AF and TC among different age groups. For participants age ≥75, higher TC levels were paradoxically associated with lower prevalence of AF after multivariable adjustment, i.e. the odds ratios of AF comparing the highest TC quartile with the lowest TC quartile for age 75–77, 78–80 and 81+ years were 0.17 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06–0.52), 0.28 (95% CI, 0.07–1.09) and 0.14 (95% CI, 0.03–0.62), respectively. Conversely, for those who were 71–74 years old, the odds ratio of AF was 2.09 (95% CI, 0.76–5.75) between the highest and the lowest TC quartiles. Conclusions There is a paradoxical association of TC with AF in Japanese-American men age ≥75, but not

Spinal pain and chronic health conditions are highly prevalent, burdensome, and costly conditions, both in the United States and globally. Using cross-sectional data from the 2016 through 2018 National Health Interview Survey (n = 26,926), we explored associations between spinal pain and chronic health conditions and investigated the influence that a set of confounders may have on the associations between spinal pain and chronic health conditions. Variance estimation method was used to compute weighted descriptive statistics and measures of associations with multinomial logistic regression models. All four chronic health conditions significantly increased the prevalence odds of spinal pain; cardiovascular conditions by 58%, hypertension by 40%, diabetes by 25% and obesity by 34%, controlling for all the confounders. For all chronic health conditions, tobacco use (45–50%), being insufficiently active (17–20%), sleep problems (180–184%), cognitive impairment (90–100%), and mental health conditions (68–80%) significantly increased the prevalence odds of spinal pain compared to cases without spinal pain. These findings provide evidence to support research on the prevention and treatment of non-musculoskeletal conditions with approaches of spinal pain management.

Study design We combined elements of cohort and crossover-cohort design. Objective The objective of this study was to compare long-term outcomes for Spinal Manipulative Therapy (SMT) and Opioid Analgesic Therapy (OAT) regarding escalation of care for patients with chronic low back pain (cLBP). Summary of background data Current evidence-based guidelines for clinical management of cLBP include both OAT and SMT. For long-term care of older adults, the efficiency and value of continuing either OAT or SMT are uncertain. Methods We examined Medicare claims data spanning a five-year period. We included older Medicare beneficiaries with an episode of cLBP beginning in 2013. All patients were continuously enrolled under Medicare Parts A, B, and D. We analyzed the cumulative frequency of encounters indicative of an escalation of care for cLBP, including hospitalizations, emergency department visits, advanced diagnostic imaging, specialist visits, lumbosacral surgery, interventional pain medicine techniques, and encounters for potential complications of cLBP. Results SMT was associated with lower rates of escalation of care as compared to OAT. The adjusted rate of escalated care encounters was approximately 2.5 times higher for initial choice of OAT vs. initial choice of SMT (with weighted propensity scoring: rate ratio 2.67, 95% CI 2.64-2.69, p Conclusions Among older Medicare beneficiaries who initiated long-term care for cLBP with opioid analgesic therapy, the adjusted rate of escalated care encounters was significantly higher as compared to those who initiated care with spinal manipulative therapy.Level of Evidence: 3.

OBJECTIVES. Cervical mobilization and manipulation are two therapies commonly used for chronic neck pain (CNP). However, the safety, especially of cervical manipulation, is controversial. This study identifies the clinical scenarios for which an expert panel rated cervical mobilization and manipulation as appropriate and inappropriate. METHODS. An expert panel, following a well-validated modified-Delphi approach, used an evidence synthesis and clinical acumen to develop and then rate the appropriateness of cervical mobilization and manipulation for each of an exhaustive list of clinical scenarios for CNP. Key patient characteristics were identified using decision tree analysis (DTA). RESULTS. Three hundred seventy-two clinical scenarios were defined and rated by an 11-member expert panel as to the appropriateness of cervical mobilization and manipulation. Across clinical scenarios more were rated inappropriate than appropriate for both therapies, and more scenarios were rated inappropriate for manipulation than mobilization. However, the number of patients presenting with each scenario is not yet known. Nevertheless, DTA indicates that all clinical scenarios that included red flags (e.g., fever, cancer, inflammatory arthritides or vasculitides), and some others involving major neurologic findings, especially if previous manual therapy was unfavorable, were rated as inappropriate for both cervical mobilization and manipulation. DTA also identified the absence of cervical disc herniation, stenosis, or foraminal osteophytosis on additional testing as the most important patient characteristic in predicting ratings of appropriate. CONCLUSIONS. Clinical guidelines for CNP should include information on the clinical scenarios for which cervical mobilization and manipulation were found inappropriate, including those with red flags, and others involving major neurologic findings if previous manual therapy was unfavorable.

Study design Retrospective observational study. Objective Opioid Analgesic Therapy (OAT) and Spinal Manipulative Therapy (SMT) are evidence-based strategies for treatment of chronic low back pain (cLBP), but the long-term safety of these therapies is uncertain. The objective of this study was to compare OAT versus SMT with regard to risk of adverse drug events (ADEs) among older adults with cLBP. Summary of background data We examined Medicare claims data spanning a 5-year period on fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 to 84 years, continuously enrolled under Medicare Parts A, B, and D for a 60-month study period, and with an episode of cLBP in 2013. We excluded patients with a diagnosis of cancer or use of hospice care. Methods All included patients received long-term management of cLBP with SMT or OAT. We assembled cohorts of patients who received SMT or OAT only, and cohorts of patients who crossed over from OAT to SMT or from SMT to OAT. We used Poisson regression to estimate the adjusted incidence rate ratio for outpatient ADE among patients who initially chose OAT as compared with SMT. Results With controlling for patient characteristics, health status, and propensity score, the adjusted rate of ADE was more than 42 times higher for initial choice of OAT versus initial choice of SMT (rate ratio 42.85, 95% CI 34.16-53.76, P Conclusion Among older Medicare beneficiaries who received long-term care for cLBP the adjusted rate of ADE for patients who initially chose OAT was substantially higher than those who initially chose SMT.Level of Evidence: 2.

Study design RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RUAM) applied to chiropractic manipulation for patients with chronic low-back pain (CLBP) and chronic neck pain (CNP). Objective Determine the rate of appropriate care provided by US chiropractors. Summary of background data Spinal manipulation has been shown effective for CLBP and CNP but may not be appropriate for all patients with these conditions. Methods Ratings of the appropriateness of spinal and cervical manipulation previously developed by two RUAM expert panels were applied to data abstracted from random samples of patient charts from chiropractors in six US regions to determine the appropriateness of manipulation for each patient. Results Of 125 chiropractors sampled, 89 provided charts that could be abstracted. Of the 2128 charts received, 1054 were abstracted. Charts received but not abstracted included 460 that were unusable (e.g., illegible), and 555 did not have CLBP or CNP. Across the abstracted charts 72% had CLBP, 57% had CNP, and 29% had both; 84% of patients with CLBP and 86% with CNP received manipulation. Patients with CLBP who had minor neurologic findings, sciatic nerve irritation, or no joint dysfunction were significantly less likely to receive manipulation. Patients with CNP who had substantial trauma etiology, no joint dysfunction, or no radiographs were significantly less likely to receive manipulation. Most manipulation for CLBP (64%) was appropriate and most manipulation for CNP (93%) was for patients where appropriateness was uncertain or equivocal. The proportions of patients receiving inappropriate manipulation for either condition were low (1%-3%) as were the numbers of patients presenting to these chiropractors for which manipulation was inappropriate. Conclusion Chiropractors in this US sample tend to provide manipulation to very few patients with CLBP or CNP for which it is inappropriate. However, more research is needed to determine which patients with CNP benefit from manipulation.Level of Evidence: 4.

Introduction Waist circumference is a common anthropometric measure for predicting abdominal obesity and insulin resistance. We developed optimal waist circumference cut points for children aged 2 to 8 years in the US-Affiliated Pacific (USAP) region based on the relationship of waist circumference and acanthosis nigricans in this population. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional analysis from the Children's Healthy Living Program's 2012-2013 data on 4,023 children. We used receiver-operating characteristic analysis to determine the sensitivity and specificity for acanthosis nigricans across waist circumference, by sex and age. We determined optimal waist circumference cutoff points corresponding to Youden index (J), (equal to [sensitivity + specificity] - 1), with acanthosis nigricans. We compared these cut points with the 90th percentile. Results The 90th-percentile cut points for boys aged 2 to 5 years (58.15 cm) and 6 to 8 years (71.63 cm) were slightly higher than for girls in both age groups (aged 2-5 y, 57.97 cm; 6-8 y: 70.37 cm). The optimal cut points (corresponding to the highest sensitivity and specificity) were as follows: for boys aged 2 to 5 years, 90th percentile (58.25 cm; sensitivity, 48.0%; specificity, 91.5%); for boys aged 6 to 8 years, 78th percentile (63.59 cm; sensitivity, 86.8%; specificity, 82.8%); for girls aged 2 to 5 years, 62nd percentile (53.27 cm; sensitivity, 71.4%; specificity, 63.1%), and for girls aged 6 to 8 years, 80th percentile (63.63 cm; sensitivity, 55.4%; specificity, 82.9%). Conclusion Among USAP children, waist circumference was a reasonable predictor for acanthosis nigricans. Further analysis is warranted to examine causes of acanthosis nigricans at lower-than-expected waist circumference percentiles. The cut points can be used for early detection of metabolic risk.

Background Heart disease remains the leading cause of death globally with substantial variabilities in mortalities by gender and region. Smoking and alcohol drinking are known modifiable health behaviors associated with heart disease. This study aims to estimate the prevalence of heart disease and to examine the association with smoking and drinking behavior for men and women in the United States (US) and China. Methods This study utilized the Harmonized data from the US Health and Retirement Study (HRS) and the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS), which are sister surveys as part of the Gateway to Global Aging Data (https://g2aging.org/). We performed cross-sectional comparisons using the 2016 wave HRS and 2015 wave CHARLS data. Age was categorized into four groups (50–59, 60–69, 70–79, and 80 years or older) and smoking and drinking behavior were combined to neither, smoking only, drinking only and both behaviors. Weighted analyses were conducted to estimate the prevalence and prevalence ratios (PRs) of heart disease accounting for complex survey design. Results The overall prevalence of heart disease was higher in men (24.5%) than in women (20.6%) in the US. In contrast, women had higher prevalence (22.9%) than men (16.1%) in China. The prevalence of heart disease increased by age with increasing gender gap in the US, while in China, the highest prevalence was observed in the 70–79 age group and gender difference were more apparent before 80 years of age. Adjusting for socio-demographic variables and health conditions, smoking only was associated with a higher prevalence of heart disease in both countries and the associations were stronger among women (US: PR = 1.39, 95%CI: 1.26 to 1.54; China: PR = 1.49, 95%CI: 1.30 to 1.72) than among men (US: PR = 1.20, 95%CI: 1.04 to 1.38; China: PR = 1.37, 95%CI: 0.94 to 1.98). Conclusions Findings from this study will improve present understanding of heart disease etiology and provide essential insights for future prevention, treatment, and control. Better management of smoking behaviors by gender might be beneficial for reducing the burden of heart disease in both countries and worldwide.

STUDY DESIGN. Markov model. OBJECTIVE. Examine the one-year effectiveness and cost-effectiveness (societal and payer perspectives) of adding nonpharmacologic interventions for chronic low back pain (CLBP) to usual care using a decision analytic model-based approach. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. Treatment guidelines now recommend many safe and effective nonpharmacologic interventions for CLBP. However, little is known regarding their effectiveness in subpopulations (e.g., high-impact chronic pain patients), nor about their cost-effectiveness. METHODS. The model included four health states: high-impact chronic pain (substantial activity limitations); no pain; and two others without activity limitations, but with higher (moderate-impact) or lower (low-impact) pain. We estimated intervention-specific transition probabilities for these health states using individual patient-level data from 10 large randomized trials covering 17 nonpharmacologic therapies. The model was run for nine 6-week cycles to approximate a 1-year time horizon. Quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) weights were based on six-dimensional health state short form (SF-6D) scores; healthcare costs were based on 2003–2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data; and lost productivity costs used in the societal perspective were based on reported absenteeism. Results were generated for two target populations, 1) a typical baseline mix of patients with CLBP (25% low-impact, 35% moderate-impact and 40% high-impact chronic pain) and, 2) high-impact chronic pain patients. RESULTS. From the societal perspective, all but two of the therapies were cost-effective (

Purpose This is the first study in Tennessee to measure opioid use in injured workers and among the first nationally to use a prescription drug monitoring program to do so. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate the prevalence of opioid use after injury and associated characteristics among workers reporting one injury to Tennessee Workers’ Compensation. Methods Injured workers identified in Workers’ Compensation records 2013–2015 were linked to their prescription history in Tennessee's prescription drug monitoring database. Results Among 172,256 injured workers, the prevalence of receiving an opioid after injury was 22.8% in 1 week, 29.7% in 1 month, and 33.3% in 6 months. Receiving an opioid was associated with having a fracture (odds ratio, 4.9; 95% confidence interval, 4.64–5.11 vs. other injuries). Hydrocodone short-acting was the most commonly received opioid (69.5% of injured workers), and the mean of each worker's maximum dose was 42.8 morphine milligram equivalents (SD 39.26). Ten percent of injured workers who received opioids also received a benzodiazepine. Conclusions Injured workers have a high prevalence of opioid use after injury, but prescribing patterns generally tend to follow Tennessee prescribing guidelines.

Introduction Intrauterine devices and contraceptive implants are recommended as first-line contraceptives by health care professional societies. However, uptake among US women lags substantially behind other developed countries. Little information is available on the extent to which clinicians document discussion about long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) in this patient population. We sought to determine the frequency with which clinicians document LARC discussion with eligible women aged 14 to 25 years in a training clinic and evaluate factors associated with LARC discussion and uptake. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of all visits of nonpregnant women aged 14 to 25 years seen at an obstetrics and gynecology resident physician clinic during a calendar year. A logistic regression model was used to assess demographic factors associated with LARC education and uptake. Results Among 450 visits by eligible patients, LARC discussion was documented during 47.8% (215/450) of visits. Among visits with documentation of LARC counseling, 45.6% (98/215) had documentation of a LARC placement plan. Among patients who decided to initiate LARC, 40.8% (40/98) had a device placed at the same visit. LARC placement was documented during 8.9% (40/450) of visits. Clinicians documented LARC counseling for women aged 14 to 19 years more frequently than for women aged 20 to 25 years. Compared with women who did not use any method of contraception, clinicians documented LARC counseling less frequently for women who used short-term hormonal contraception. Discussion Clinicians in a training clinic did not document LARC counseling for more than half of eligible patients. Every clinical visit is an opportunity to assess risk of unintended pregnancy and ensure that contraceptive needs are addressed.

Context Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) and yoga are both recommended by systematic reviews in the evidence-based research literature for low back pain management. It is unknown, to the authors’ knowledge, what the effect of personal experience with OMT or yoga, reading research articles on OMT or yoga, or both will have on medical students’ recommendations for these treatment options to future patients with chronic low back pain. Objective To evaluate the likelihood of osteopathic medical students recommending OMT or yoga to treat patients with chronic low back pain based on their personal experience or reading research articles that recommend OMT or yoga for patients with chronic low back pain. Methods In this prospective cohort study, researchers administered an anonymous 18-question online survey for osteopathic medical students. The survey included a patient vignette, 2 evidence-based articles, and multiple choice, yes/no, and Likert-type questions. Participants were recruited via email from all 4 years of medical school. Between-group differences in proportions were assessed with descriptive statistics and χ2 tests; differences within groups were assessed with the McNemar test; and Fischer exact tests were used when expected cell counts were less than 5. Results A total of 180 participants (100 male, 80 female) completed the study. Personal experience increased the likelihood of osteopathic medical students recommending OMT (P<.018) or yoga (PPP Conclusion Personal experience and reading evidence-based research may increase the likelihood that osteopathic medical students will recommend OMT to future patients with chronic low back pain.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly limited patients' access to care for spine-related symptoms and disorders. However, physical distancing between clinicians and patients with spine-related symptoms is not solely limited to restrictions imposed by pandemic-related lockdowns. In most low- and middle-income countries, as well as many underserved marginalized communities in high-income countries, there is little to no access to clinicians trained in evidence-based care for people experiencing spinal pain. Objective The aim of this study is to describe the development and present the components of evidence-based patient and clinician guides for the management of spinal disorders where in-person care is not available. Methods Ultimately, two sets of guides were developed (one for patients and one for clinicians) by extracting information from the published Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) papers. An international, interprofessional team of 29 participants from 10 countries on 4 continents participated. The team included practitioners in family medicine, neurology, physiatry, rheumatology, psychology, chiropractic, physical therapy, and yoga, as well as epidemiologists, research methodologists, and laypeople. The participants were invited to review, edit, and comment on the guides in an open iterative consensus process. Results The Patient Guide is a simple 2-step process. The first step describes the nature of the symptoms or concerns. The second step provides information that a patient can use when considering self-care, determining whether to contact a clinician, or considering seeking emergency care. The Clinician Guide is a 5-step process: (1) Obtain and document patient demographics, location of primary clinical symptoms, and psychosocial information. (2) Review the symptoms noted in the patient guide. (3) Determine the GSCI classification of the patient’s spine-related complaints. (4) Ask additional questions to determine the GSCI subclassification of the symptom pattern. (5) Consider appropriate treatment interventions. Conclusions The Patient and Clinician Guides are designed to be sufficiently clear to be useful to all patients and clinicians, irrespective of their location, education, professional qualifications, and experience. However, they are comprehensive enough to provide guidance on the management of all spine-related symptoms or disorders, including triage for serious and specific diseases. They are consistent with widely accepted evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. They also allow for adequate documentation and medical record keeping. These guides should be of value during periods of government-mandated physical or social distancing due to infectious diseases, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic. They should also be of value in underserved communities in high-, middle-, and low-income countries where there is a dearth of accessible trained spine care clinicians. These guides have the potential to reduce the overutilization of unnecessary and expensive interventions while empowering patients to self-manage uncomplicated spinal pain with the assistance of their clinician, either through direct in-person consultation or via telehealth communication.

BACKGROUND. Chronic spinal pain is prevalent and long-lasting. Although provider-based nonpharmacologic therapies such as chiropractic care have been recommended, healthcare and coverage policies provide little guidance or evidence regarding long-term use of this care. OBJECTIVE. Determine relationships between visit frequency and outcomes for patients using ongoing chiropractic care for chronic spinal pain. STUDY DESIGN. Observational 3-month longitudinal study. SETTING. Data collected from patients of 124 chiropractic clinics in six US regions. METHODS. Examined the impact of visit frequency and patient characteristics on pain (pain 0–10 numerical rating scale) and functional outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index or ODI for low-back pain and Neck Disability Index or NDI for neck pain, both 0–100 scale) using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) in a large national sample of chiropractic patients with chronic low-back pain (CLBP) and/or chronic neck pain (CNP). This study was approved by the RAND Human Subjects Protection Committee and registered under ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03162952. RESULTS. 1,362 patients with CLBP and 1,214 with CNP were included in a series of HLM models. Unconditional (time-only) models showed patients on average had mild pain and function and significant, but slight improvements in these over the 3-month observation period: back and neck pain decreased by 0.40 and 0.44 points, respectively; function improved by 2.7 (ODI) and 3.0 points (NDI) (all p

Heart disease remains the leading cause of death globally by gender and region. Smoking and alcohol drinking are known modifiable health behaviors of heart disease. Utilizing data from the US Health and Retirement Study and the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study, this study examines heart disease disparities and the association with smoking and drinking behavior among men and women in the US and China. Smoking and drinking behavior were combined to neither, smoke-only, drink-only, and both. In the US, the prevalence was higher in men (24.5%, 95% CI: 22.5–26.6%) than in women (20.6%, 95% CI: 19.3–22.1%) and a higher prevalence was found in the smoke-only group for both genders. In contrast, women in China had higher prevalence (22.9%, 95% CI: 21.7–24.1%) than men (16.1%, 95% CI: 15.1–17.2%), and the prevalence for women who smoked or engaged in both behaviors were ~1.5 times (95% CI: 1.3–1.8, p < 0.001) those who did not smoke or drink, but no statistical difference were found in men. The findings might be due to differences in smoking and drinking patterns and cultures by gender in the two countries and gender inequality among older adults in China. Culturally tailored health promotion strategies will help reduce the burden of heart disease.

Introduction Several studies indicated there is an association between central sleep apnea (CSA) and atrial fibrillation (AF) in older populations. However, few studies assessed the impact of ethnicity on the association. We assessed the hypothesis that ethnicity modifies the association between CSA and AF in older men. Methods We did a cross-sectional analysis using two population studies of Japanese-American (JA) and White-American (WA) men. The Kuakini Honolulu-Asia Aging Study (HAAS) is a longitudinal cohort study of JA men living in Hawaii. Sleep data were collected between 1999–2000. The Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (Mr.OS) Sleep Study was conducted between 2003–2005 on the continental U.S. The majority of Mr.OS participants were WA. We selected 79–90 year old males, who had overnight polysomnography from both studies. Total participants were 690 JA and 871 WA men. Obstructive apnea-hypopnea index (OAHI) was the measure of the number of obstructive apneas and hypopneas with >4% oxygen desaturation. Additionally, the central apnea index (CAI) was the measure of the number of central apneas. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) was categorized as none (OAHI =30). CSA was defined by CAI>=5. Cheyne-Stokes breathing (CSB) was defined as a minimum consecutive 5–10 minute period of a crescendo-decrescendo respiratory pattern associated with CSA. A board-certified physician confirmed AF by single lead electrocardiography of polysomnography. Results The prevalence of AF was 5.7% in JA and 9.1% in WA. The prevalence of CSA and CSB in WA were higher than in JA (11.5% vs 6.5% and 5.7% vs 3.3%, respectively). Conversely, the prevalence of severe OSA in JA (20.7%) was higher than in WA (11.8%). In multivariable-adjusted logistic regression models, CSA was associated with higher odds of AF, and the association was stronger in JA [Odds Ratio (OR)=4.77, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.95–11.64] than in WA (OR=2.05, 95% CI: 1.07–3.94). CSB showed similar trends as CSA. In contrast, the severity of OSA was not significantly associated with AF in either ethnicity. Conclusion Ethnicity modifies the association between CSA and AF. In older JA and WA men, screening for CSA might be important to prevent AF. Support (if any)

Purpose: The purpose of this report is to describe the Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) contributors, disclosures, and methods for reporting transparency on the development of the recommendations. Methods: World Spine Care convened the GSCI to develop an evidence-based, practical, and sustainable healthcare model for spinal care. The initiative aims to improve the management, prevention, and public health for spine-related disorders worldwide; thus, global representation was essential. A series of meetings established the initiative’s mission and goals. Electronic surveys collected contributorship and demographic information, and experiences with spinal conditions to better understand perceptions and potential biases that were contributing to the model of care. Results: Sixty-eight clinicians and scientists participated in the deliberations and are authors of one or more of the GSCI articles. Of these experts, 57 reported providing spine care in 34 countries, (i.e., low-, middle-, and high-income countries, as well as underserved communities in high-income countries.) The majority reported personally experiencing or having a close family member with one or more spinal concerns including: spine-related trauma or injury, spinal problems that required emergency or surgical intervention, spinal pain referred from non-spine sources, spinal deformity, spinal pathology or disease, neurological problems, and/or mild, moderate, or severe back or neck pain. There were no substantial reported conflicts of interest. Conclusion: The GSCI participants have broad professional experience and wide international distribution with no discipline dominating the deliberations. The GSCI believes this set of papers has the potential to inform and improve spine care globally. Graphical abstract: These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.[Figure not available: see fulltext.]

BackgroundAlthough the delivery of appropriate healthcare is an important goal, the definition of what constitutes appropriate care is not always agreed upon. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method is one of the most well-known and used approaches to define care appropriateness from the clinical perspective—i.e., that the expected effectiveness of a treatment exceeds its expected risks. However, patient preferences (the patient perspective) and costs (the healthcare system perspective) are also important determinants of appropriateness and should be considered.MethodsWe examined the impact of including information on patient preferences and cost on expert panel ratings of clinical appropriateness for spinal mobilization and manipulation for chronic low back pain and chronic neck pain.ResultsThe majority of panelists thought patient preferences were important to consider in determining appropriateness and that their inclusion could change ratings, and half thought the same about cost. However, few actually changed their appropriateness ratings based on the information presented on patient preferences regarding the use of these therapies and their costs. This could be because the panel received information on average patient preferences for spinal mobilization and manipulation whereas some panelists commented that appropriateness should be determined based on the preferences of individual patients. Also, because these therapies are not expensive, their ratings may not be cost sensitive. The panelists also generally agreed that preferences and costs would only impact their ratings if the therapies were considered clinically appropriate.ConclusionsThis study found that the information presented on patient preferences and costs for spinal mobilization and manipulation had little impact on the rated appropriateness of these therapies for chronic low back pain and chronic neck pain. Although it was generally agreed that patient preferences and costs were important to the appropriateness of M/M for CLBP and CNP, it seems that what would be most important were the preferences of the individual patient, not patients in general, and large cost differentials.

Objective Ulipristal acetate (UPA) is a prescription emergency contraceptive pill (ECP). Despite the potential for UPA to reduce the risk of unintended pregnancies, a recent study in Hawaii demonstrated less than 3% of pharmacies stocked UPA and less than 23% reported the ability to order it. The primary outcome of our study was to assess the availability of UPA in a sample of large cities nationwide. Study design We conducted a telephone-based secret shopper study of 533 retail pharmacies sampled proportionally from 10 large cities in five geographic regions across the US. Callers represented themselves as uninsured 18-year-old women attempting to fill prescriptions for UPA between February and May 2016. Using a semi-structured questionnaire, callers inquired regarding availability and use of UPA. Results Less than 10% (33/344; 95% CI: 6.5–12.7%) of pharmacies indicated the ability to immediately fill a UPA prescription, while 72% (224/311; 95% CI: 65.0–77.0%) of pharmacies without immediate availability reported the ability to order UPA, with the median predicted wait time of 24 h (IQR: 21.5 to 26.0 h). Conclusion Despite evidence for increased efficacy of UPA over levonorgestrel (LNG) ECPs, the availability of UPA in a sample of US major cities is extremely limited. Given that ECPs should be taken as soon as possible after unprotected sex, the long wait times when ordering UPA present an access barrier. Efforts to improve the availability of UPA are important to optimize the potential of ECPs to decrease unintended pregnancy following unprotected sex. Implications Interventions are needed to address barriers to obtaining UPA from retail pharmacies nationwide.

Introduction Few studies indicated the impact of ethnicity on an association between central sleep apnea (CSA) and atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF) in older populations. We assessed possible ethnic differences in the association among elderly Japanese-American and White-American men. Methods We performed a cross-sectional analysis using two population studies of Japanese-American and White-American men. The Kuakini Honolulu-Asia Aging Study is a longitudinal cohort study of Japanese-American men living in Hawaii. Sleep data were collected between 1999 and 2000. The Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (Mr.OS) Sleep Study was conducted between 2003 and 2005 on the continental U.S. The majority of Mr.OS participants were White-American. We selected 79–90 year old males, who had overnight polysomnography from both studies. Total participants were 690 Japanese-American and 871 White-American men. The central apnea index (CAI) was the measure of the number of central apneas. CSA was defined by CAI>=5. Cheyne-Stokes breathing (CSB) was defined as a minimum consecutive 5–10 min period of a crescendo-decrescendo respiratory pattern associated with CSA. Results The prevalence of AF was 5.7% in Japanese-American men and 9.0% in White-American men. The prevalence of CSA and CSB in White-Americans were higher than in Japanese-Americans (11.5% vs 6.5% and 5.7% vs 3.3%, respectively). In multivariable-adjusted logistic regression models, CSA was associated with higher odds of AF, and the association was stronger in Japanese-Americans [Odds Ratio (OR) = 4.77, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.95–11.67] than in White-Americans (OR = 2.09, 95 %CI: 1.09–4.01). CSB showed similar trends as CSA. Conclusions After adjustment, CSA and CSB were significantly associated with AF in both Japanese-American and White-American men.

BACKGROUND. Spinal mobilization and manipulation are two therapies found to be generally safe and effective for chronic low back pain (CLBP). However, the question remains whether they are appropriate for all CLBP patients. RESEARCH DESIGN. An expert panel used a well-validated approach, including an evidence synthesis and clinical acumen, to develop and then rate the appropriateness of the use of spinal mobilization and manipulation across an exhaustive list of clinical scenarios which could present for CLBP. Decision tree analysis (DTA) was used to identify the key patient characteristics that affected the ratings. RESULTS. Nine hundred clinical scenarios were defined and then rated by a 9-member expert panel as to the appropriateness of spinal mobilization and manipulation. Across clinical scenarios more were rated appropriate than inappropriate. However, the number patients presenting with each scenario is not yet known. Nevertheless, DTA indicates that all clinical scenarios that included major neurologic findings, and some others involving imaging findings of central herniated nucleus pulposus, spinal stenosis, or free fragments, were rated as inappropriate for both spinal mobilization and manipulation. DTA also identified the absence of these imaging findings and no previous laminectomy as the most important patient characteristics in predicting ratings of appropriate. CONCLUSIONS. A well-validated expert panel-based approach was used to develop and then rate the appropriateness of the use of spinal mobilization and manipulation across the clinical scenarios which could present for CLBP. Information on the clinical scenarios for which these therapies are inappropriate should be added to clinical guidelines for CLBP.

The purpose of the study was to compare patterns of utilization and charges generated by medical doctors (MDs), doctors of chiropractic (DCs), and physical therapists (PTs) for the treatment of headache in North Carolina.Retrospective analysis of claims data from the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees from 2000 to 2009. Data were extracted from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina for the North Carolina State Health Plan using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, diagnostic codes for headache. The claims were separated by individual provider type, combination of provider types, and referral patterns.The majority of patients and claims were in the MD-only or MD plus referral patterns. Chiropractic patterns represented less than 10% of patients. Care patterns with single-provider types and no referrals incurred the least charges on average for headache. When care did not include referral providers or services, MD with DC care was generally less expensive than MD care with PT. However, when combined with referral care, MD care with PT was generally less expensive. Compared with MD-only care, risk-adjusted charges (available 2006-2009) for patients in the middle risk quintile were significantly less for DC-only care.Utilization and expenditures for headache treatment increased from 2000 to 2009 across all provider groups. MD care represented the majority of total allowed charges in this study. MD care and DC care, alone or in combination, were overall the least expensive patterns of headache care. Risk-adjusted charges were significantly less for DC-only care.

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is the second most common neurodegenerative disease in the United States with more than 50,000 new cases annually. Studies have reported an inverse relationship between smoking status and the risk for PD. Current smoking status, the number of pack-years smoked, and the lifetime duration of smoking have all been shown to have a lower risk for PD compared to non-smokers. However, studies exploring smoking behaviors in a multiethnic cohort with an ample sample size of PD cases to analyze smoking differences between men and women are rare. Using the Multiethnic Cohort (MEC), our study included 680 self-reported cases of PD from total sample of 98,191 Blacks, Latinos, Japanese, Native Hawaiians, and Whites from Hawaii and Los Angeles surveyed in 2003-2007. Stratified by sex, we conducted a cross-sectional logistic regression analysis to examine the odds of developing PD by various smoking indicators. Overall, current smokers had the lowest risk for PD (OR=0.46, 95%CI 0.27-0.76) compared to non-smokers. The odds of developing PD gradually decreased as the number of years of smoking increased with participants that smoked for 50 years or more having the lowest odds of developing PD (OR= 0.41, 95%CI 0.22-0.78) compared to non-smokers. Using a multiethnic cohort, our analyses further supported the inverse association between PD and smoking status, as well as the number of years of smoking. Future studies are necessary to investigate the possible genetic modulation on the relationship between tobacco and PD.

Purpose: Spinal disorders, including back and neck pain, are major causes of disability, economic hardship, and morbidity, especially in underserved communities and low- and middle-income countries. Currently, there is no model of care to address this issue. This paper provides an overview of the papers from the Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI), which was convened to develop an evidence-based, practical, and sustainable, spinal healthcare model for communities around the world with various levels of resources. Methods: Leading spine clinicians and scientists around the world were invited to participate. The interprofessional, international team consisted of 68 members from 24 countries, representing most disciplines that study or care for patients with spinal symptoms, including family physicians, spine surgeons, rheumatologists, chiropractors, physical therapists, epidemiologists, research methodologists, and other stakeholders. Results: Literature reviews on the burden of spinal disorders and six categories of evidence-based interventions for spinal disorders (assessment, public health, psychosocial, noninvasive, invasive, and the management of osteoporosis) were completed. In addition, participants developed a stratification system for surgical intervention, a classification system for spinal disorders, an evidence-based care pathway, and lists of resources and recommendations to implement the GSCI model of care. Conclusion: The GSCI proposes an evidence-based model that is consistent with recent calls for action to reduce the global burden of spinal disorders. The model requires testing to determine feasibility. If it proves to be implementable, this model holds great promise to reduce the tremendous global burden of spinal disorders. Graphical abstract: These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.[Figure not available: see fulltext.].

Purpose: The purpose of this report is to describe the development of a classification system that would apply to anyone with a spine-related concern and that can be used in an evidence-based spine care pathway. Methods: Existing classification systems for spinal disorders were assembled. A seed document was developed through round-table discussions followed by a modified Delphi process. International and interprofessional clinicians and scientists with expertise in spine-related conditions were invited to participate. Results: Thirty-six experts from 15 countries participated. After the second round, there was 95% agreement of the proposed classification system. The six major classifications included: no or minimal symptoms (class 0); mild symptoms (i.e., neck or back pain) but no interference with activities (class I); moderate or severe symptoms with interference of activities (class II); spine-related neurological signs or symptoms (class III); severe bony spine deformity, trauma or pathology (class IV); and spine-related symptoms or destructive lesions associated with systemic pathology (class V). Subclasses for each major class included chronicity and severity when different interventions were anticipated or recommended. Conclusions: An international and interprofessional group developed a comprehensive classification system for all potential presentations of people who may seek care or advice at a spine care program. This classification can be used in the development of a spine care pathway, in clinical practice, and for research purposes. This classification needs to be tested for validity, reliability, and consistency among clinicians from different specialties and in different communities and cultures. Graphical abstract: These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.[Figure not available: see fulltext.].

Purpose: The purpose of this report is to describe the development of a list of resources necessary to implement a model of care for the management of spine-related concerns anywhere in the world, but especially in underserved communities and low- and middle-income countries. Methods: Contents from the Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) Classification System and GSCI care pathway papers provided a foundation for the resources list. A seed document was developed that included resources for spine care that could be delivered in primary, secondary and tertiary settings, as well as resources needed for self-care and community-based settings for a wide variety of spine concerns (e.g., back and neck pain, deformity, spine injury, neurological conditions, pathology and spinal diseases). An iterative expert consensus process was used using electronic surveys. Results: Thirty-five experts completed the process. An iterative consensus process was used through an electronic survey. A consensus was reached after two rounds. The checklist of resources included the following categories: healthcare provider knowledge and skills, materials and equipment, human resources, facilities and infrastructure. The list identifies resources needed to implement a spine care program in any community, which are based upon spine care needs. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first international and interprofessional attempt to develop a list of resources needed to deliver care in an evidence-based care pathway for the management of people presenting with spine-related concerns. This resource list needs to be field tested in a variety of communities with different resource capacities to verify its utility. Graphical abstract: These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.[Figure not available: see fulltext.].

The purpose of this report is to describe the development of an evidence-based care pathway that can be implemented globally. The Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) care pathway development team extracted interventions recommended for the management of spinal disorders from six GSCI articles that synthesized the available evidence from guidelines and relevant literature. Sixty-eight international and interprofessional clinicians and scientists with expertise in spine-related conditions were invited to participate. An iterative consensus process was used. After three rounds of review, 46 experts from 16 countries reached consensus for the care pathway that includes five decision steps: awareness, initial triage, provider assessment, interventions (e.g., non-invasive treatment; invasive treatment; psychological and social intervention; prevention and public health; specialty care and interprofessional management), and outcomes. The care pathway can be used to guide the management of patients with any spine-related concern (e.g., back and neck pain, deformity, spinal injury, neurological conditions, pathology, spinal diseases). The pathway is simple and can be incorporated into educational tools, decision-making trees, and electronic medical records. A care pathway for the management of individuals presenting with spine-related concerns includes evidence-based recommendations to guide health care providers in the management of common spinal disorders. The proposed pathway is person-centered and evidence-based. The acceptability and utility of this care pathway will need to be evaluated in various communities, especially in low- and middle-income countries, with different cultural background and resources. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. The Global Spine Care Initiative and this study were funded by grants from the Skoll Foundation and NCMIC Foundation. World Spine Care provided financial management for this project. The funders had no role in study design, analysis, or preparation of this paper. Sí

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review was to identify risk factors, prognostic factors, and comorbidities associated with common spinal disorders. METHODS: A scoping review of the literature of common spinal disorders was performed through September 2016. To identify search terms, we developed 3 terminology groups for case definitions: 1) spinal pain of unknown origin, 2) spinal syndromes, and 3) spinal pathology. We used a comprehensive strategy to search PubMed for meta-analyses and systematic reviews of case-control studies, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials for risk and prognostic factors and cross-sectional studies describing associations and comorbidities. RESULTS: Of 3,453 candidate papers, 145 met study criteria and were included in this review. Risk factors were reported for group 1: non-specific low back pain (smoking, overweight/obesity, negative recovery expectations), non-specific neck pain (high job demands, monotonous work); group 2: degenerative spinal disease (workers' compensation claim, degenerative scoliosis), and group 3: spinal tuberculosis (age, imprisonment, previous history of tuberculosis), spinal cord injury (age, accidental injury), vertebral fracture from osteoporosis (type 1 diabetes, certain medications, smoking), and neural tube defects (folic acid deficit, anti-convulsant medications, chlorine, influenza, maternal obesity). A range of comorbidities was identified for spinal disorders. CONCLUSION: Many associated factors for common spinal disorders identified in this study are modifiable. The most common spinal disorders are co-morbid with general health conditions, but there is a lack of clarity in the literature differentiating which conditions are merely comorbid versus ones that are risk factors. Modifiable risk factors present opportunities for policy, research, and public health prevention efforts on both the individual patient and community levels. Further research into prevention interventions for spinal disorders is needed to address this gap in the literature. The Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) was funded by grants from the Skoll Foundation (www.skoll.org) and NCMIC Foundation (www.ncmicfoundation.org) (SH). World Spine Care provided financial management for the GSCI project. The grantors had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Open access funding for this study provided by Brighthall, Inc. BNG and CDJ are officers of Brighthall. Sí

Background Areca (betel) nut is considered a Group 1 human carcinogen shown to be associated with other chronic diseases in addition to cancer. This paper describes the areca (betel) nut chewing trend in Guam, and health behaviors of chewers in Guam and Saipan. Methods The areca (betel) nut module in the Guam Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey was used to calculate the 5-year (2011–2015) chewing trend. To assess the association between areca (betel) nut chewing and health risks in the Mariana Islands, a cross-section of 300 chewers, ≥18 years old, were recruited from households in Guam and Saipan. Self-reported socio-demographics, oral health behaviors, chronic disease status, diet, and physical activity were collected. Anthropometry was measured. Only areca (betel) nut-specific and demographic information were collected from youth chewers in the household. Results The 5-year areca (betel) nut chewing prevalence in Guam was 11% and increased among Non-Chamorros, primarily other Micronesians, from 2011 (7%) to 2015 (13%). In the household survey, most adult chewers (46%) preferred areca nut with betel leaf, slaked lime, and tobacco. Most youth chewers (48%) preferred areca nut only. Common adult chronic conditions included diabetes (14%), hypertension (26%), and obesity (58%). Conclusion The 5-year areca (betel) nut chewing prevalence in Guam is comparable to the world estimate (10–20%), though rising among Non-Chamorros. Adult and youth chewers may be at an increased risk for oral cancer. Adult chewers have an increased risk of other chronic health conditions. Cancer prevention and intervention strategies should incorporate all aspects of health.

Breastfeeding is considered the best infant feeding method, yet initiation and duration rates in the United States are lower than recommended by medical and public health professionals. Positive attitudes toward breastfeeding of the male partner are important in a mother's success at initiating and maintaining breastfeeding. This study measured the infant feeding attitudes of low-income women and their male partners using the Iowa Infant Feeding Attitude Scale (IIFAS), investigated the reliability and validity of the measure in male partners, and examined the associations of the partner's attitudes with the mother's attitudes and intention to breastfeed. A convenience sample of 112 pregnant women and their male partners completed a survey including sociodemographic items, the IIFAS, and their intended infant feeding method in the hospital and in the first few weeks after the infant's birth (breastfeeding, formula feeding, mixed, and don't know). Mother's and partner's IIFAS scores were highly correlated, and higher scores of both mothers and partners were significantly associated with their intentions to breastfeed. With each increased point on mother's and partner's IIFAS scores, the odds that the mother and her partner intended to breastfeed in the first few weeks increased 12% and 20%, respectively. This is the first U.S. study to validate the IIFAS with male partners. Future research on breastfeeding attitudes and attitude-changing interventions is needed to see if improving partners' attitudes toward breastfeeding will also improve mothers' attitudes and if that increases initiation and duration of breastfeeding.

Purpose To elicit neck pain (NP) patients’ preference scores for their current health, and investigate the association between their scores and NP disability. Methods Rating scale scores (RSs) and standard gamble scores (SGs) for current health were elicited from chronic NP patients (n = 104) and patients with NP following a motor vehicle accident (n = 116). Patients were stratified into Von Korff Pain Grades: Grade I (low-intensity pain, few activity limitations); Grade II (high-intensity pain, few activity limitations); Grade III (pain with high disability levels, moderate activity limitations); and Grade IV (pain with high disability levels, several activity limitations). Multivariable regression quantified the association between preference scores and NP disability. Results Mean SGs and RSs were as follows: Grade I patients: 0.81, 0.76; Grade II: 0.70, 0.60; Grade III: 0.64, 0.44; Grade IV: 0.57, 0.39. The association between preference scores and NP disability depended on type of NP and preference-elicitation method. Chronic NP patients’ scores were more strongly associated with depressive symptoms than with NP disability. In both samples, NP disability explained little more than random variance in SGs, and up to 51% of variance in RSs. Conclusion Health-related quality-of-life is considerably diminished in NP patients. Depressive symptoms and preference-elicitation methods influence preference scores that NP patients assign to their health.

Postpartum depression affects 10-20% of women and causes significant morbidity and mortality among mothers, children, families, and society, but little is known about postpartum depression among the individual Asian and Pacific Islander racial/ethnic groups. This study sought to indentify the prevalence of postpartum depression among common Asian and Pacific Islander racial/ethnic groups. Data from the Hawaii Pregnancy Risk Assessment and Monitoring System (PRAMS), a population-based surveillance system on maternal behaviors and experiences before, during, and after the birth of a live infant, were analyzed from 2004 through 2007 and included 7,154 women. Questions on mood and interest in activities since giving birth were combined to create a measure of Self-reported Postpartum Depressive Symptoms (SRPDS). A series of generalized logit models with maternal race or ethnicity adjusted for other sociodemographic characteristics evaluated associations between SRPDS and an intermediate level of symptoms as possible indicators of possible SRPDS. Of all women in Hawaii with a recent live birth, 14.5% had SRPDS, and 30.1% had possible SRPDS. The following Asian and Pacific Islander racial or ethnic groups were studied and found to have higher odds of SRPDS compared with white women: Korean (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.8;95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0-4.0), Filipino (AOR = 2.2;95% CI: 1.7-2.8), Chinese (AOR = 2.0;95% CI: 1.5-2.7), Samoan (AOR = 1.9;95% CI: 1.2-3.2), Japanese (AOR = 1.6;95% CI: 1.2-2.2), Hawaiian (AOR = 1.7;95% CI: 1.3-2.1), other Asian (AOR = 3.3;95% CI: 1.9-5.9), other Pacific Islander (AOR = 2.2;95% CI: 1.5-3.4), and Hispanic (AOR = 1.9;95% CI: 1.1-3.4). Women who had unintended pregnancies (AOR = 1.4;95% CI: 1.2-1.6), experienced intimate partner violence (AOR = 3.7;95% CI: 2.6-5.5), smoked (AOR = 1.5;95% CI: 1.2-2.0), used illicit drugs (AOR = 1.9;95% CI: 1.3-3.9), or received Women, Infant, and Children (WIC) benefits during pregnancy (AOR = 1.4;95% CI: 1.2-2.6) were more likely to have SRPDS. Several groups also were at increased risk for possible SRPDS, although this risk was not as prominent as seen with the risk for SRPDS. One in seven women reported SRPDS, and close to a third reported possible SRPDS. Messages about postpartum depression should be incorporated into current programs to improve screening, treatment, and prevention of SRPDS for women at risk.

Objective The most widely used neck-specific measure in intervention trials is the 10-item Neck Disability Index (NDI), which is assumed to be a unidimensional interval scale, as shown by how NDI data are scored, analyzed, and interpreted. Our objective was to use modern measurement methods to test this assumption (and thereby to also test the validity of calculating summed scores and parametric statistics on NDI data) through Rasch analysis. Methods NDI data from 521 trial subjects with neck pain were fit to the Rasch model. We examined threshold ordering of NDI items, fit of data to model expectations, presence of differential item functioning, and whether or not the set of NDI items collectively measure a single construct, which is a requirement for calculating summative scores. Results There was a lack of fit of data to the Rasch model (χ2 = 140.35, 70 df; P < 0.001). Five items (personal care, lifting, headaches, work, and recreation) had disordered response thresholds. Differential item functioning was detected for age and sex. The NDI items did not contribute to a single construct. Unidimensionality and interval scaling were achieved by removing 2 of the 10 items (resulting in the NDI-8), and converting NDI-8 ordinal (paper) summative scores to NDI-8 interval (Rasch-weighted) scores. Conclusion As originally proposed and conventionally used, the NDI is not a unidimensional scale, and has only ordinal scaling. This raises fundamental doubts about the practice of calculating change scores and other parametric statistics on NDI data. A revised 8-item version provides unidimensional interval-level measurement of neck pain disability.

Best evidence synthesis. To identify, critically appraise, and synthesize literature from 1980 through 2006 on noninvasive interventions for neck pain and its associated disorders. No comprehensive systematic literature reviews have been published on interventions for neck pain and its associated disorders in the past decade. We systematically searched Medline and screened for relevance literature published from 1980 through 2006 on the use, effectiveness, and safety of noninvasive interventions for neck pain and associated disorders. Consensus decisions were made about the scientific merit of each article; those judged to have adequate internal validity were included in our best evidence synthesis. Of the 359 invasive and noninvasive intervention articles deemed relevant, 170 (47%) were accepted as scientifically admissible, and 139 of these related to noninvasive interventions (including health care utilization, costs, and safety). For whiplash-associated disorders, there is evidence that educational videos, mobilization, and exercises appear more beneficial than usual care or physical modalities. For other neck pain, the evidence suggests that manual and supervised exercise interventions, low-level laser therapy, and perhaps acupuncture are more effective than no treatment, sham, or alternative interventions; however, none of the active treatments was clearly superior to any other in either the short-or long-term. For both whiplash-associated disorders and other neck pain without radicular symptoms, interventions that focused on regaining function as soon as possible are relatively more effective than interventions that do not have such a focus. Our best evidence synthesis suggests that therapies involving manual therapy and exercise are more effective than alternative strategies for patients with neck pain; this was also true of therapies which include educational interventions addressing self-efficacy. Future efforts should focus on the study of noninvasive interventions for patients with radicular symptoms and on the design and evaluation of neck pain prevention strategies.

STUDY DESIGN: Best evidence synthesis. OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence-based guidance to primary care clinicians about how to best assess and treat patients with neck pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is a need to translate the results of clinical and epidemiologic studies into meaningful and practical information for clinicians. METHODS: Based on best evidence syntheses of published studies on the risk, prognosis, assessment, and management of people with neck pain and its associated disorders, plus additional research projects and focused literature reviews reported in this supplement, the 12-member multidisciplinary Scientific Secretariat of the Neck Pain Task Force followed a 4-step approach to develop practical guidance for clinicians. RESULTS: The Neck Pain Task Force recommends that people seeking care for neck pain should be triaged into 4 groups: Grade I neck pain with no signs of major pathology and no or little interference with daily activities; Grade II neck pain with no signs of major pathology, but interference with daily activities; Grade III neck pain with neurologic signs of nerve compression; Grade IV neck pain with signs of major pathology. In the emergency room after blunt trauma to the neck, triage should be based on the NEXUS criteria or the Canadian C-spine rule. Those with a high risk of fracture should be further investigated with plain radiographs and/or CT-scan. In ambulatory primary care, triage should be based on history and physical examination alone, including screening for red flags and neurologic examination for signs of radiculopathy. Exercises and mobilization have been shown to provide some degree of short-term relief of Grade I or Grade II neck pain after a motor vehicle collision. Exercises, mobilization, manipulation, analgesics, acupuncture, and low-level laser have been shown to provide some degree of short-term relief of Grade I or Grade II neck pain without trauma. Those with confirmed Grade III and severe persistent radicular symptoms might benefit from corticosteroid injections or surgery. Those with confirmed Grade IV neck pain require management specific to the diagnosed pathology. CONCLUSION: The best available evidence suggests initial assessment for neck pain should focus on triage into 4 grades, and those with common neck pain (Grade I and Grade II) might be offered the listed noninvasive treatments if short-term relief is desired. Language: en

Best evidence synthesis. To undertake a best evidence synthesis on course and prognosis of neck pain and its associated disorders in the general population. Knowing the course of neck pain guides expectations for recovery. Identifying prognostic factors assists in planning public policies, formulating interventions, and promoting lifestyle changes to decrease the burden of neck pain. The Bone and Joint Decade 2000 –2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain. Findings fromstudiesmeeting criteria for scientific validity were abstracted into evidence tables and included in a best evidence synthesis. We found 226 articles on the course and prognostic factors in neck pain and its associated disorders. After critical review, 70 (31) of these were accepted on scientific merit. Six studies related to course and 7 to prognostic factors in the general population. Between half and three quarters of persons in these populations with current neck pain will report neck pain again 1 to 5 years later. Younger age predicted better outcome. General exercise was unassociated with outcome, although regular bicycling predicted poor outcome in 1 study. Psychosocial factors, including psychologic health, coping patterns, and need to socialize, were the strongest prognostic factors. Several potential prognostic factors have not been well studied, including degenerative changes, genetic factors, and compensation policies. The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for this symptom. General exercise was not prognostic of better outcome; however, several psychosocial factors were prognostic of outcome.

Study design Best evidence synthesis. Objective To report on gaps in the literature and make methodologic recommendations based on our review of the literature on frequency and risk factors, assessment, intervention, and course and prognostic factors for neck pain and its associated disorders. Summary of background data The scientific literature on neck pain is large and of variable quality. We reviewed 1203 studies and judged 46% to be of sufficient scientific validity to be included in the best evidence synthesis. Scientific quality varied across study topics, and fundamental questions remain about important issues. Methods The Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders (Neck Pain Task Force) conducted a critical review of the literature published between 1980 and 2006 to assemble the best evidence on neck pain and its associated disorders. Studies meeting criteria for scientific validity were included in a best evidence synthesis. Results We outline a large number of gaps in the current literature. For example, we found important gaps in our knowledge about neck pain in children (risk factors, screening criteria to rule out serious injury, management, course and prognosis); and in the prevention of neck pain-related activity limitations. Few studies addressed the impact of culture or social policies (such as governmental health policies or insurance compensation policies) on neck pain. A number of important questions remain about the effectiveness of commonly used interventions for neck pain. Conclusion The Neck Pain Task Force undertook a best evidence synthesis to establish a baseline of the current best evidence on the course and prognosis for whiplash-associated disorders. We identify a number of gaps in the current knowledge, and provide recommendations for the conduct of future studies.

Objectives. We examined barriers to influenza vaccination among long-term care facility (LTCF) health care workers in Southern California and developed simple, effective interventions to improve influenza vaccine coverage of these workers. Methods. In 2002, health care workers at LTCFs were surveyed regarding their knowledge and attitudes about influenza and the influenza vaccine. Results were used to develop 2 interventions, an educational campaign and Vaccine Day (a well-publicized day for free influenza vaccination of all employees at the worksite). Seventy facilities were recruited to participate in an intervention trial and randomly assigned to 4 study groups. Results. The combination of Vaccine Day and an educational campaign was most effective in increasing vaccine coverage (53% coverage; prevalence ratio [PR]=1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.24, 1.71, compared with 27% coverage in the control group). Vaccine Day alone was also effective (46% coverage; PR= 1.41; 95% CI=1.17, 1.71). The educational campaign alone was not effective in improving coverage levels (34% coverage; PR=1.18; 95% CI=0.93, 1.50). Conclusion. Influenza vaccine coverage of LTCF health care workers can be improved by providing free vaccinations at the worksite with a well-publicized Vaccine Day.