Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial.


Journal

The Lancet. Rheumatology
ISSN: 2665-9913
Titre abrégé: Lancet Rheumatol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101765308

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jul 2020
Historique:
entrez: 4 7 2020
pubmed: 4 7 2020
medline: 4 7 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Sciatica has a substantial impact on individuals and society. Stratified care has been shown to lead to better outcomes among patients with non-specific low back pain, but it has not been tested for sciatica. We aimed to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of stratified care versus non-stratified usual care for patients presenting with sciatica in primary care. We did a two-parallel arm, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial across three centres in the UK (North Staffordshire, North Shropshire/Wales, and Cheshire). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical diagnosis of sciatica, access to a mobile phone or landline number, were not pregnant, were not currently receiving treatment for the same problem, and had no previous spinal surgery. Patients were recruited from general practices and randomly assigned (1:1) by a remote web-based service to stratified care or usual care, stratified by centre and stratification group allocation. In the stratified care arm, a combination of prognostic and clinical criteria associated with referral to spinal specialist services were used to allocate patients to one of three groups for matched care pathways. Group 1 was offered brief advice and support in up to two physiotherapy sessions; group 2 was offered up to six physiotherapy sessions; and group 3 was fast-tracked to MRI and spinal specialist assessment within 4 weeks of randomisation. The primary outcome was self-reported time to first resolution of sciatica symptoms, defined as "completely recovered" or "much better" on a 6-point ordinal scale, collected via text messages or telephone calls. Analyses were by intention to treat. Health-care costs and cost-effectiveness were also assessed. This trial is registered on the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN75449581. Between May 28, 2015, and July 18, 2017, 476 patients from 42 general practices around three UK centres were randomly assigned to stratified care or usual care (238 in each arm). For the primary outcome, the overall response rate was 89% (9467 of 10 601 text messages sent; 4688 [88%] of 5310 in the stratified care arm and 4779 [90%] of 5291 in the usual care arm). Median time to symptom resolution was 10 weeks (95% CI 6·4-13·6) in the stratified care arm and 12 weeks (9·4-14·6) in the usual care arm, with the survival analysis showing no significant difference between the arms (hazard ratio 1·14 [95% CI 0·89-1·46]). Stratified care was not cost-effective compared to usual care. The stratified care model for patients with sciatica consulting in primary care was not better than usual care for either clinical or health economic outcomes. These results do not support a transition to this stratified care model for patients with sciatica. National Institute for Health Research.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Sciatica has a substantial impact on individuals and society. Stratified care has been shown to lead to better outcomes among patients with non-specific low back pain, but it has not been tested for sciatica. We aimed to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of stratified care versus non-stratified usual care for patients presenting with sciatica in primary care.
METHODS METHODS
We did a two-parallel arm, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial across three centres in the UK (North Staffordshire, North Shropshire/Wales, and Cheshire). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical diagnosis of sciatica, access to a mobile phone or landline number, were not pregnant, were not currently receiving treatment for the same problem, and had no previous spinal surgery. Patients were recruited from general practices and randomly assigned (1:1) by a remote web-based service to stratified care or usual care, stratified by centre and stratification group allocation. In the stratified care arm, a combination of prognostic and clinical criteria associated with referral to spinal specialist services were used to allocate patients to one of three groups for matched care pathways. Group 1 was offered brief advice and support in up to two physiotherapy sessions; group 2 was offered up to six physiotherapy sessions; and group 3 was fast-tracked to MRI and spinal specialist assessment within 4 weeks of randomisation. The primary outcome was self-reported time to first resolution of sciatica symptoms, defined as "completely recovered" or "much better" on a 6-point ordinal scale, collected via text messages or telephone calls. Analyses were by intention to treat. Health-care costs and cost-effectiveness were also assessed. This trial is registered on the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN75449581.
FINDINGS RESULTS
Between May 28, 2015, and July 18, 2017, 476 patients from 42 general practices around three UK centres were randomly assigned to stratified care or usual care (238 in each arm). For the primary outcome, the overall response rate was 89% (9467 of 10 601 text messages sent; 4688 [88%] of 5310 in the stratified care arm and 4779 [90%] of 5291 in the usual care arm). Median time to symptom resolution was 10 weeks (95% CI 6·4-13·6) in the stratified care arm and 12 weeks (9·4-14·6) in the usual care arm, with the survival analysis showing no significant difference between the arms (hazard ratio 1·14 [95% CI 0·89-1·46]). Stratified care was not cost-effective compared to usual care.
INTERPRETATION CONCLUSIONS
The stratified care model for patients with sciatica consulting in primary care was not better than usual care for either clinical or health economic outcomes. These results do not support a transition to this stratified care model for patients with sciatica.
FUNDING BACKGROUND
National Institute for Health Research.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32617529
doi: 10.1016/S2665-9913(20)30099-0
pii: S2665-9913(20)30099-0
pmc: PMC7323615
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e401-e411

Subventions

Organisme : Department of Health
ID : RP-PG-0617-20005
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : RP_2014-04-026
Pays : United Kingdom

Informations de copyright

© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.

Références

Pain. 2008 Sep 15;138(3):571-6
pubmed: 18334283
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2011 May;153(5):967-74
pubmed: 21365358
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011 Sep 25;12:208
pubmed: 21943339
BMJ. 2007 Jun 23;334(7607):1313-7
pubmed: 17585160
Eur Spine J. 2015 Mar;24(3):444-51
pubmed: 24838505
Int J Epidemiol. 2006 Oct;35(5):1292-300
pubmed: 16943232
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Dec 15;25(24):3130-9
pubmed: 11124729
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1983 Mar;8(2):141-4
pubmed: 6222486
Qual Life Res. 2011 Dec;20(10):1727-36
pubmed: 21479777
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983 Jun;67(6):361-70
pubmed: 6880820
Lancet. 2011 Oct 29;378(9802):1560-71
pubmed: 21963002
Int J Surg. 2012;10(1):28-55
pubmed: 22036893
Spine J. 2018 Jun;18(6):941-947
pubmed: 29031994
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017 Apr 26;18(1):172
pubmed: 28441971
Spine J. 2018 Jun;18(6):1030-1040
pubmed: 29174459
Eur Spine J. 2016 May;25(5):1389-1392
pubmed: 26842881
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995 Sep 1;20(17):1899-908; discussion 1909
pubmed: 8560339
BJGP Open. 2017 Oct 04;1(3):bjgpopen17X101085
pubmed: 30564680
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019 Jul 4;20(1):313
pubmed: 31272439
Eur J Pain. 2013 Sep;17(8):1126-37
pubmed: 23494852
J Physiother. 2017 Apr;63(2):120
pubmed: 28325480
Arthritis Rheum. 2008 May 15;59(5):632-41
pubmed: 18438893
Eur J Pain. 2014 Apr;18(4):455-64
pubmed: 23939653
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Oct 19;93(20):1906-14
pubmed: 22012528
Ann Fam Med. 2014 Mar-Apr;12(2):102-11
pubmed: 24615305
J Clin Epidemiol. 1988;41(4):313-21
pubmed: 3351539
Clin J Pain. 2013 Jul;29(7):644-54
pubmed: 23328336
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2010 Apr;24(2):241-52
pubmed: 20227645
J Pain. 2005 Mar;6(3):149-58
pubmed: 15772908
BMJ. 2001 Jun 9;322(7299):1401-5
pubmed: 11397747
Pain. 1995 Aug;62(2):233-40
pubmed: 8545149
Spine J. 2017 Oct;17(10):1464-1471
pubmed: 28483706

Auteurs

Kika Konstantinou (K)

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.
Haywood Hospital, Midlands Partnership Foundation NHS Trust, Staffordshire, UK.

Martyn Lewis (M)

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.
Keele Clinical Trials Unit, Keele University, Keele, UK.

Kate M Dunn (KM)

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.

Reuben Ogollah (R)

Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

Majid Artus (M)

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.

Jonathan C Hill (JC)

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.

Gemma Hughes (G)

Keele Clinical Trials Unit, Keele University, Keele, UK.

Michelle Robinson (M)

Keele Clinical Trials Unit, Keele University, Keele, UK.

Benjamin Saunders (B)

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.

Bernadette Bartlam (B)

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.
Family Medicine and Primary Care, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

Jesse Kigozi (J)

Health Economics unit, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Sue Jowett (S)

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.
Health Economics unit, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Christian D Mallen (CD)

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.

Elaine M Hay (EM)

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.

Danielle A van der Windt (DA)

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.

Nadine E Foster (NE)

Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.
Keele Clinical Trials Unit, Keele University, Keele, UK.

Classifications MeSH