Search

Background: The effectiveness of acupuncture for chronic low back pain (cLBP) has not been studied specifically in the 65-and-older population. To inform the validity and generalizability of future acupuncture studies among older adults, we characterized elderly participants’ prior experience with and views toward acupuncture and tested for clinical and sociodemographic differences between acupuncture-naïve and non-naïve participants. Methods: Data for this study were collected during the baseline telephone interview from the participants enrolled in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California site of an NIH-funded, multicenter clinical trial of acupuncture for cLBP in older adults. Results: Nearly two-thirds (65.6 %) of participants surveyed reported they had previously received acupuncture treatment with the vast majority seeking acupuncture treatment for pain-related issues (84.8 %). The majority of these participants reported relatively modest levels of exposure to acupuncture with most participants (63.1 %) reporting fewer than 10 treatment sessions over their lifetimes. There were no significant differences in age, sex, race, ethnicity, disability scores, income levels, or pain levels between the acupuncture-naïve and non-naïve groups. Conclusion: Contextual consideration for prior acupuncture utilization rates is warranted and may be higher than expected or previously reported. We found few differences in baseline characteristics between participants who were acupuncture-naïve and those with prior acupuncture experience; thus, future pragmatic clinical trials might relax previous acupuncture-use considerations in their recruitment criteria. For trials focused on acupuncture-naive patients, it may be more feasible to expand the definition of ''acupuncture-naive'' based on lifetime acupuncture visits or time since last treatment. Trial registration: The protocol was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT04982315).

Abstract Background Back pain is one of the most important causes of functional limitation, disability, and utilization of health care resources for adults of all ages, but especially among older adults. Despite the high prevalence of back pain in this population, important questions remain unanswered regarding the comparative effectiveness of commonly used diagnostic tests and treatments in the elderly. The overall goal of the Back pain Outcomes using Longitudinal Data (BOLD) project is to establish a rich, sustainable registry to describe the natural history and evaluate prospectively the effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of interventions for patients 65 and older with back pain. Methods/design BOLD is enrolling 5,000 patients ≥ 65 years old who present to a primary care physician with a new episode of back pain. We are recruiting study participants from three integrated health systems (Kaiser-Permanente Northern California, Henry Ford Health System in Detroit and Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates/ Harvard Pilgrim Health Care in Boston). Registry patients complete validated, standardized measures of pain, back pain-related disability, and health-related quality of life at enrollment and 3, 6 and 12 months later. We also have available for analysis the clinical and administrative data in the participating health systems’ electronic medical records. Using registry data, we will conduct an observational cohort study of early imaging compared to no early imaging among patients with new episodes of back pain. The aims are to: 1) identify predictors of early imaging and; 2) compare pain, functional outcomes, diagnostic testing and treatment utilization of patients who receive early imaging versus patients who do not receive early imaging. In terms of predictors, we will examine patient factors as well as physician factors. Discussion By establishing the BOLD registry, we are creating a resource that contains patient-reported outcome measures as well as electronic medical record data for elderly patients with back pain. The richness of our data will allow better matching for comparative effectiveness studies than is currently possible with existing datasets. BOLD will enrich the existing knowledge base regarding back pain in the elderly to help clinicians and patients make informed, evidence-based decisions regarding their care.

Abstract Background Modern clinical-research practice favors placebo controls over usual-care controls whenever a credible placebo exists. An unrecognized consequence of this preference is that clinicians are more limited in their ability to provide the benefits of the non-specific healing effects of placebos in clinical practice. Methods We examined the issues in choosing between placebo and usual-care controls. We considered why placebo controls place constraints on clinicians and the trade-offs involved in the choice of control groups. Results We find that, for certain studies, investigators should consider usual-care controls, even if an adequate placebo is available. Employing usual-care controls would be of greatest value for pragmatic trials evaluating treatments to improve clinical care and for which threats to internal validity can be adequately managed without a placebo-control condition. Conclusions Intentionally choosing usual-care controls, even when a satisfactory placebo exists, would allow clinicians to capture the value of non-specific therapeutic benefits that are common to all interventions. The result could be more effective, patient-centered care that makes the best use of both specific and non-specific benefits of medical interventions.

Abstract Background Lumbar spinal stenosis is one of the most common causes of low back pain among older adults and can cause significant disability. Despite its prevalence, treatment of spinal stenosis symptoms remains controversial. Epidural steroid injections are used with increasing frequency as a less invasive, potentially safer, and more cost-effective treatment than surgery. However, there is a lack of data to judge the effectiveness and safety of epidural steroid injections for spinal stenosis. We describe our prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial that tests the hypothesis that epidural injections with steroids plus local anesthetic are more effective than epidural injections of local anesthetic alone in improving pain and function among older adults with lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods We will recruit up to 400 patients with lumbar central canal spinal stenosis from at least 9 clinical sites over 2 years. Patients with spinal instability who require surgical fusion, a history of prior lumbar surgery, or prior epidural steroid injection within the past 6 months are excluded. Participants are randomly assigned to receive either ESI with local anesthetic or the control intervention (epidural injections with local anesthetic alone). Subjects receive up to 2 injections prior to the primary endpoint at 6 weeks, at which time they may choose to crossover to the other intervention. Participants complete validated, standardized measures of pain, functional disability, and health-related quality of life at baseline and at 3 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3, 6, and 12 months after randomization. The primary outcomes are Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and a numerical rating scale measure of pain intensity at 6 weeks. In order to better understand their safety, we also measure cortisol, HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, weight, and blood pressure at baseline, and at 3 and 6 weeks post-injection. We also obtain data on resource utilization and costs to assess cost-effectiveness of epidural steroid injection. Discussion This study is the first multi-center, double-blind RCT to evaluate the effectiveness of epidural steroid injections in improving pain and function among older adults with lumbar spinal stenosis. The study will also yield data on the safety and cost-effectiveness of this procedure for older adults. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01238536

Abstract Background Meeting recruitment goals is challenging for many clinical trials conducted in primary care populations. Little is known about how the use of different recruitment strategies affects the types of individuals choosing to participate or the conclusions of the study. Methods A secondary analysis was performed using data from participants recruited to a clinical trial evaluating acupuncture for chronic back pain among primary care patients in a large integrated health care organization. We used two recruitment methods: mailed letters of invitation and an advertisement in the health plan's magazine. For these two recruitment methods, we compared recruitment success (% randomized, treatment completers, drop outs and losses to follow-up), participant characteristics, and primary clinical outcomes. A linear regression model was used to test for interaction between treatment group and recruitment method. Results Participants recruited via mailed letters closely resembled those responding to the advertisement in terms of demographic characteristics, most aspects of their back pain history and current episode and beliefs and expectations about acupuncture. No interaction between method of recruitment and treatment group was seen, suggesting that study outcomes were not affected by recruitment strategy. Conclusion In this trial, the two recruitment strategies yielded similar estimates of treatment effectiveness. However, because this finding may not apply to other recruitment strategies or trial circumstances, trials employing multiple recruitment strategies should evaluate the effect of recruitment strategy on outcome. Trial registration Clinical Trials.gov NCT00065585.

Abstract Background Although many clinicians believe there are clinically important subgroups of persons with "non-specific" low back pain, such subgroups have not yet been clearly identified. As part of a large trial evaluating acupuncture for chronic low back pain, we sought to identify subgroups of participants that were particularly responsive to acupuncture. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of data for the 638 participants in our clinical trial comparing different types of acupuncture to usual care to identify baseline characteristics that predicted responses to individualized, standardized, or simulated acupuncture treatments. After identifying factors that predicted improvements in back-related function or symptoms, we determined if these factors were more likely to predict improvement for those receiving the acupuncture treatments than for those receiving usual care. This was accomplished by testing for an interaction between the prognostic factors and treatment group in four models: functional outcomes (measured by the Roland-Morris Disability Scale) at 8 and 52 weeks post-randomization and symptom outcomes (measured with a numerical rating scale) at 8 and 52 weeks. Results Overall, the strongest predictors of improvement in back function and symptoms were higher baseline levels of these measures, receipt of an acupuncture treatment, and non-use of narcotic analgesics. Benefit from acupuncture compared to usual care was greater with worse pre-treatment levels of back dysfunction (interaction p < 0.004 for the functional outcome, Roland Morris Disability Scale at 8 weeks). No other consistent interactions were observed. Conclusion This secondary analysis found little evidence for the existence of subgroups of patients with chronic back pain that would be especially likely to benefit from acupuncture. However, persons with chronic low back pain who had more severe baseline dysfunction had the most short-term benefit from acupuncture.

Abstract Background Despite ethical imperatives, informing research participants about the results of the studies in which they take part is not often performed. This is due, in part, to the costs and burdens of communicating with each participant after publication of the results. Methods Following the closeout and publication of a randomized clinical trial of saw palmetto for treatment of symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia, patients were invited back to the research center to participate in a group presentation of the study results. Results Approximately 10% of participants attended one of two presentation sessions. Reaction to the experience of the group presentation was very positive among the attendees. Conclusion A group presentation to research participants is an efficient method of communicating study results to those who desire to be informed and was highly valued by those who attended. Prospectively planning for such presentations and greater scheduling flexibility may result in higher attendance rates. Trial Registration Number Clinicaltrials.gov #NCT00037154

Abstract Background Chronic back pain is a major public health problem and the primary reason patients seek acupuncture treatment. Therefore, an objective assessment of acupuncture efficacy is critical for making informed decisions about its appropriate role for patients with this common condition. This study addresses methodological shortcomings that have plagued previous studies evaluating acupuncture for chronic low back pain. Methods and Design A total of 640 participants (160 in each of four arms) between the ages of 18 and 70 years of age who have low back pain lasting at least 3 months will be recruited from integrated health care delivery systems in Seattle and Oakland. They will be randomized to one of two forms of Traditional Chinese Medical (TCM) acupuncture needling (individualized or standardized), a "control" group (simulated acupuncture), or to continued usual medical care. Ten treatments will be provided over 7 weeks. Study participants and the "Diagnostician" acupuncturists who evaluate participants and propose individualized treatments will be masked to the acupuncture treatment actually assigned each participant. The "Therapist" acupuncturists providing the treatments will not be masked but will have limited verbal interaction with participants. The primary outcomes, standard measures of dysfunction and bothersomeness of low back pain, will be assessed at baseline, and after 8, 26, and 52 weeks by telephone interviewers masked to treatment assignment. General health status, satisfaction with back care, days of back-related disability, and use and costs of healthcare services for back pain will also be measured. The primary analysis comparing outcomes by randomized treatment assignment will be analysis of covariance adjusted for baseline value. For both primary outcome measures, this trial will have 99% power to detect the presence of a minimal clinically significant difference among all four treatment groups and over 80% power for most pairwise comparisons. Secondary analyses will compare the proportions of participants in each group that improve by a clinically meaningful amount. Conclusion Results of this trial will help clarify the value of acupuncture needling as a treatment for chronic low back pain. Trial registration Clinical Trials.gov NCT00065585.

ObjectivesIncreasing evidence demonstrates effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) for pain-related and functional disorders. In order to conduct successful and efficient trials of MBSR, evidence regarding the relative performance of strategies to improve recruitment, retention, and adherence is required, but few studies have examined these issues specifically.DesignIn preparation for a fully powered trial, we conducted a 2-arm, parallel comparison randomized controlled feasibility trial of MBSR vs. usual-care for 60 patients with migraine headache.SettingTwo large U.S. health systems in Northern California.InterventionMBSR is an 8-week classroom-based intervention that combines mindfulness meditation and yoga, with didactic presentations about stress psychology and group process/experiential education. Participants received the intervention at their choice of one of several existing, vetted community-based classes.Main outcome measuresSuccessful recruitment was defined a priori as 18 participants within any 9-week period or 60 participants enrolled within a 36-week period. We considered participants adherent to the intervention if they attended at least 5 of the 8 weekly classes and the day-long retreat.ResultsWe successfully enrolled 18 participants within a 7-week period, however, we did not attain our second goal of recruiting 60 participants within a 36-week period. Sixty-eight percent of our participants were adherent to the intervention.ConclusionsWe found that close monitoring of recruitment activities, flexibility in protocol modifications, and integration within the delivery system were crucial factors for successful participant recruitment, retention, and adherence in mindfulness research.

In 2016, the Wake County Public School System in North Carolina, the nation's 15th-largest school district, confronted two dilemmas common in U.S. education. First, a quality review had revealed weaknesses in its literacy curriculum. Although curriculum can have profound effects on student learning, not all curricula are rigorous and engaging (Steiner, 2017). Second, Wake struggled with professional learning for new literacy standards and practice shifts. Research has found that teaching expertise is the most important factor in school effectiveness, but few teachers believe their professional learning is effective. To address these difficulties, Wake adopted EL Education's open-source 3-8 language arts instructional model. This model integrates a standards aligned curriculum aimed at challenging, engaging, and empowering students with paced assessments, detailed teacher resources, and an embedded professional learning approach. The result -- if implemented well -- is a coherent approach to instruction that Kathy Toma, Wake's senior administrator for middle school English language arts, calls "a paradigm shift in pedagogy."

Inguinal hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed operations in the world, yet little is known about the genetic mechanisms that predispose individuals to develop inguinal hernias. We perform a genome-wide association analysis of surgically confirmed inguinal hernias in 72,805 subjects (5,295 cases and 67,510 controls) and confirm top associations in an independent cohort of 92,444 subjects with self-reported hernia repair surgeries (9,701 cases and 82,743 controls). We identify four novel inguinal hernia susceptibility loci in the regions of EFEMP1, WT1, EBF2 and ADAMTS6. Moreover, we observe expression of all four genes in mouse connective tissue and network analyses show an important role for two of these genes (EFEMP1 and WT1) in connective tissue maintenance/homoeostasis. Our findings provide insight into the aetiology of hernia development and highlight genetic pathways for studies of hernia development and its treatment.

Background contextPrimary care clinicians need to identify candidates for early interventions to prevent patients with acute pain from developing chronic pain.PurposeWe conducted a 2-year prospective cohort study of risk factors for the progression to chronic pain and developed and internally validated a clinical decision rule (CDR) that stratifies patients into low-, medium-, and high-risk groups for chronic pain.Study design/settingThis is a prospective cohort study in primary care.Patient samplePatients with acute low back pain (LBP, ≤30 days duration) were included.Outcome measuresOutcome measures were self-reported perceived nonrecovery and chronic pain.MethodsPatients were surveyed at baseline, 6 months, and 2 years. We conducted bivariate and multivariate regression analyses of demographic, clinical, and psychosocial variables for chronic pain outcomes, developed a CDR, and assessed its performance by calculating the bootstrapped areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) and likelihood ratios.ResultsSix hundred five patients enrolled: 13% had chronic pain at 6 months and 19% at 2 years. An eight-item CDR was most parsimonious for classifying patients into three risk levels. Bootstrapped AUC was 0.76 (0.70-0.82) for the 6-month CDR. Each 10-point score increase (60-point range) was associated with an odds ratio of 11.1 (10.8-11.4) for developing chronic pain. Using a less than 5% probability of chronic pain as the cutoff for low risk and a greater than 40% probability for high risk, likelihood ratios were 0.26 (0.14-0.48) and 4.4 (3.0-6.3) for these groups, respectively.ConclusionsA CDR was developed that may help primary care clinicians classify patients with strictly defined acute LBP into low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups for developing chronic pain and performed acceptably in 1,000 bootstrapped replications. Validation in a separate sample is needed.

BackgroundThe 9-item STarT-Back screening tool was developed in primary care patients with low back pain (LBP) to identify those at greatest risk for chronic pain and requiring targeted treatment. We conducted a secondary data analysis study to examine the performance of comparable questionnaire items in a sample of primary care patients with well-defined acute LBP.MethodsIn a prospective cohort study, 605 primary care patients with LBP of less than 30 days answered a questionnaire with 6 items identical and 3 items analogous to the 9-item STarT-Back. Participants were followed up at 6 months and 2 years. STarT-Back rules were applied to classify participant's risk of chronic LBP, and the performance of the screening items in predicting outcomes was assessed using likelihood ratios.ResultsThe proportion of patients with chronic pain at follow-up was considerably lower (6 months: 22%; 2 years: 25%) than in the STarT-Back validation cohort (40%) of patients with pain of any duration. The probability of developing chronic pain given a high-risk designation by items similar to the STarT-Back increased the pre-test probability to 31% and 35%. Likelihood ratios were close to 1.ConclusionsA risk classification schema using the recommended cut-off scores with items similar to the STarT-Back in a primary care population with strictly defined acute LBP had limited ability to identify persons who progressed to chronic pain. The results suggest caution when applying the STarT-Back in patients with acute LBP and a need to consider a modification of its cut-offs.

BackgroundThe 9-item STarT-Back screening tool was developed in primary care patients with low back pain (LBP) to identify those at greatest risk for chronic pain and requiring targeted treatment. We conducted a secondary data analysis study to examine the performance of comparable questionnaire items in a sample of primary care patients with well-defined acute LBP.MethodsIn a prospective cohort study, 605 primary care patients with LBP of less than 30 days answered a questionnaire with 6 items identical and 3 items analogous to the 9-item STarT-Back. Participants were followed up at 6 months and 2 years. STarT-Back rules were applied to classify participant's risk of chronic LBP, and the performance of the screening items in predicting outcomes was assessed using likelihood ratios.ResultsThe proportion of patients with chronic pain at follow-up was considerably lower (6 months: 22%; 2 years: 25%) than in the STarT-Back validation cohort (40%) of patients with pain of any duration. The probability of developing chronic pain given a high-risk designation by items similar to the STarT-Back increased the pre-test probability to 31% and 35%. Likelihood ratios were close to 1.ConclusionsA risk classification schema using the recommended cut-off scores with items similar to the STarT-Back in a primary care population with strictly defined acute LBP had limited ability to identify persons who progressed to chronic pain. The results suggest caution when applying the STarT-Back in patients with acute LBP and a need to consider a modification of its cut-offs.

BackgroundAnalyses from double-blind randomized trials have reported lower mortality among participants who were more adherent to placebo compared with those who were less adherent. We explored this phenomenon by analyzing data from the placebo arm of the Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study (HERS), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of estrogen plus progestin for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in postmenopausal women. Our primary aim was to measure and explain the association between adherence to placebo and total mortality among the placebo-allocated participants in the HERS. Secondary aims included assessment of the association between placebo adherence and cause-specific morbidity and mortality.MethodsParticipants with "higher placebo adherence" were defined as having taken at least 75% of their placebo study medication during each individual's participation in the study, whereas those with "lower placebo adherence" took less than 75%. The primary outcome was in-study all-cause mortality.ResultsMore adherent participants had significantly lower total mortality compared with less adherent participants (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.93). Adjusting for available confounders did not change the magnitude or significance of the estimates. Analyses revealed that the association of higher adherence and mortality might be explained, in part, by time-dependent confounding.ConclusionsAnalyses of the HERS data support a strong association between adherence to placebo study medication and mortality. Although probably not due to simple confounding by healthy lifestyle factors, the underlying mechanism for the association remains unclear. Further analyses of this association are necessary to explain this observation.

A provocative finding from several double-blind clinical trials has been the association between greater adherence to placebo study medication and better health outcomes. We used data from the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction (SOLVD) Treatment Trial (SOLVD-TT) and the SOLVD Prevention Trial (SOLVD-PT) to examine whether such associations could be validated and to examine several sources of bias and potential confounding.Survival analytic methods were used to estimate the association between placebo adherence and several health outcomes, employing a number of modeling techniques to test for the existence of alternative explanations for the association. Higher adherence was defined as having taken ≥75% of prescribed study medication.Higher placebo adherence was associated with improved overall survival in both SOLVD-TT and SOLVD-PT [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.35 to 0.79 and HR = 0.52, 95%CI: 0.38 to 0.71, respectively]. Associations were similar for fatal or non-fatal cardiovascular or coronary heart disease events. Adjustment for both modifiable and non-modifiable cardiac risk factors (including age, gender, diabetes, blood pressure, smoking, weight, alcohol use, and levels of education) had minimal effect on the strength of the association. Little evidence of bias was found as an explanation for this relationship.In these two trials, better adherence to placebo was associated with markedly superior health outcomes, including total in-study mortality and incident cardiovascular events. No important confounders were identified. These data suggest there may exist strong but unrecognized determinants of health outcomes for which placebo adherence is a marker.

Abstract Background Meeting recruitment goals is challenging for many clinical trials conducted in primary care populations. Little is known about how the use of different recruitment strategies affects the types of individuals choosing to participate or the conclusions of the study. Methods A secondary analysis was performed using data from participants recruited to a clinical trial evaluating acupuncture for chronic back pain among primary care patients in a large integrated health care organization. We used two recruitment methods: mailed letters of invitation and an advertisement in the health plan's magazine. For these two recruitment methods, we compared recruitment success (% randomized, treatment completers, drop outs and losses to follow-up), participant characteristics, and primary clinical outcomes. A linear regression model was used to test for interaction between treatment group and recruitment method. Results Participants recruited via mailed letters closely resembled those responding to the advertisement in terms of demographic characteristics, most aspects of their back pain history and current episode and beliefs and expectations about acupuncture. No interaction between method of recruitment and treatment group was seen, suggesting that study outcomes were not affected by recruitment strategy. Conclusion In this trial, the two recruitment strategies yielded similar estimates of treatment effectiveness. However, because this finding may not apply to other recruitment strategies or trial circumstances, trials employing multiple recruitment strategies should evaluate the effect of recruitment strategy on outcome. Trial registration Clinical Trials.gov NCT00065585.

Abstract Background Although many clinicians believe there are clinically important subgroups of persons with "non-specific" low back pain, such subgroups have not yet been clearly identified. As part of a large trial evaluating acupuncture for chronic low back pain, we sought to identify subgroups of participants that were particularly responsive to acupuncture. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of data for the 638 participants in our clinical trial comparing different types of acupuncture to usual care to identify baseline characteristics that predicted responses to individualized, standardized, or simulated acupuncture treatments. After identifying factors that predicted improvements in back-related function or symptoms, we determined if these factors were more likely to predict improvement for those receiving the acupuncture treatments than for those receiving usual care. This was accomplished by testing for an interaction between the prognostic factors and treatment group in four models: functional outcomes (measured by the Roland-Morris Disability Scale) at 8 and 52 weeks post-randomization and symptom outcomes (measured with a numerical rating scale) at 8 and 52 weeks. Results Overall, the strongest predictors of improvement in back function and symptoms were higher baseline levels of these measures, receipt of an acupuncture treatment, and non-use of narcotic analgesics. Benefit from acupuncture compared to usual care was greater with worse pre-treatment levels of back dysfunction (interaction p < 0.004 for the functional outcome, Roland Morris Disability Scale at 8 weeks). No other consistent interactions were observed. Conclusion This secondary analysis found little evidence for the existence of subgroups of patients with chronic back pain that would be especially likely to benefit from acupuncture. However, persons with chronic low back pain who had more severe baseline dysfunction had the most short-term benefit from acupuncture.