丹麦初级保健中腰背或颈/胸椎疼痛患者在二级保健评估前后的医疗保健利用

IF 1.5 Q3 RHEUMATOLOGY Musculoskeletal Care Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1002/msc.70017
Stine Clausen, Jan Hartvigsen, Melker S Johansson, Lise Grethe Kjønø, Søren Grøn, Christian V Skovsgaard, Kjersti Storheim, Karin Magnusson, Margreth Grotle, Casper Nim
{"title":"丹麦初级保健中腰背或颈/胸椎疼痛患者在二级保健评估前后的医疗保健利用","authors":"Stine Clausen, Jan Hartvigsen, Melker S Johansson, Lise Grethe Kjønø, Søren Grøn, Christian V Skovsgaard, Kjersti Storheim, Karin Magnusson, Margreth Grotle, Casper Nim","doi":"10.1002/msc.70017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To describe characteristics and primary healthcare utilisation in Danish patients with low back pain (LBP) or neck/thoracic spine pain (NTP) 8 years before and 2 years after assessment in secondary care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cohort study, we included patients aged ≥ 18 who were assessed at an outpatient spine clinic from 2013 to 2021 and linked self-reported information with national registry data. We calculated the prevalence of all-cause healthcare utilisation in primary care. Then, we determined changes in the number of consultations from before to after assessment in secondary care using generalised estimating equations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 56,949 LBP patients and 18,926 NTP patients. The baseline characteristics were similar overall. For both LBP and NTP, all-cause healthcare utilisation increased slightly over time, with a substantial increase in the quarter before the secondary care assessment and a decrease after. Before the assessment, almost all patients consulted general practitioners (95%), while some consulted physiotherapists or chiropractors (60%). Overall, consultations decreased by 19% and 17% for patients with LBP and NTP from 12 to 1 month before to 1-12 months after the assessment. In contrast, 13-24 months after assessment, we found a slight increase in consultations in both groups compared to the same period before.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients with LBP and NTP were similar and used similar primary healthcare, which slightly increased over the 10 years. As physiotherapists and chiropractors are first-line providers of guideline-recommended spine pain treatment, the finding that 40% did not consult these professions the year before the secondary care assessment indicates that not all patients receive recommended care before referral.</p>","PeriodicalId":46945,"journal":{"name":"Musculoskeletal Care","volume":"22 4","pages":"e70017"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Healthcare Utilisation in Danish Primary Care Among Patients With Low Back or Neck/Thoracic Spine Pain Before and After Assessment in Secondary Care.\",\"authors\":\"Stine Clausen, Jan Hartvigsen, Melker S Johansson, Lise Grethe Kjønø, Søren Grøn, Christian V Skovsgaard, Kjersti Storheim, Karin Magnusson, Margreth Grotle, Casper Nim\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/msc.70017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To describe characteristics and primary healthcare utilisation in Danish patients with low back pain (LBP) or neck/thoracic spine pain (NTP) 8 years before and 2 years after assessment in secondary care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cohort study, we included patients aged ≥ 18 who were assessed at an outpatient spine clinic from 2013 to 2021 and linked self-reported information with national registry data. We calculated the prevalence of all-cause healthcare utilisation in primary care. Then, we determined changes in the number of consultations from before to after assessment in secondary care using generalised estimating equations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 56,949 LBP patients and 18,926 NTP patients. The baseline characteristics were similar overall. For both LBP and NTP, all-cause healthcare utilisation increased slightly over time, with a substantial increase in the quarter before the secondary care assessment and a decrease after. Before the assessment, almost all patients consulted general practitioners (95%), while some consulted physiotherapists or chiropractors (60%). Overall, consultations decreased by 19% and 17% for patients with LBP and NTP from 12 to 1 month before to 1-12 months after the assessment. In contrast, 13-24 months after assessment, we found a slight increase in consultations in both groups compared to the same period before.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients with LBP and NTP were similar and used similar primary healthcare, which slightly increased over the 10 years. As physiotherapists and chiropractors are first-line providers of guideline-recommended spine pain treatment, the finding that 40% did not consult these professions the year before the secondary care assessment indicates that not all patients receive recommended care before referral.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Musculoskeletal Care\",\"volume\":\"22 4\",\"pages\":\"e70017\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Musculoskeletal Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/msc.70017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Musculoskeletal Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/msc.70017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:描述丹麦腰痛(LBP)或颈/胸椎痛(NTP)患者在二级护理评估前8年和评估后2年的特征和初级保健利用情况。方法:在这项队列研究中,我们纳入了年龄≥18岁的患者,他们于2013年至2021年在一家脊柱门诊诊所接受评估,并将自我报告信息与国家登记数据联系起来。我们计算了初级保健中全因医疗保健利用的流行率。然后,我们使用广义估计方程确定二级护理评估前后咨询人数的变化。结果:我们纳入了56,949例LBP患者和18,926例NTP患者。基线特征总体上是相似的。对于LBP和NTP,全因医疗保健利用率随着时间的推移略有增加,在二级护理评估前的季度大幅增加,在二级护理评估后下降。在评估前,几乎所有患者(95%)都咨询全科医生,而部分患者(60%)咨询物理治疗师或脊医。总体而言,从评估前12至1个月到评估后1至12个月,LBP和NTP患者的咨询分别减少了19%和17%。相比之下,评估后13-24个月,我们发现两组的咨询与同期相比略有增加。结论:LBP和NTP患者相似,使用相似的初级保健,10年内略有增加。由于物理治疗师和脊椎按摩师是指南推荐的脊柱疼痛治疗的一线提供者,发现40%的患者在二级护理评估前一年没有咨询这些专业人员,这表明并非所有患者在转诊前都接受了推荐的治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Healthcare Utilisation in Danish Primary Care Among Patients With Low Back or Neck/Thoracic Spine Pain Before and After Assessment in Secondary Care.

Objectives: To describe characteristics and primary healthcare utilisation in Danish patients with low back pain (LBP) or neck/thoracic spine pain (NTP) 8 years before and 2 years after assessment in secondary care.

Methods: In this cohort study, we included patients aged ≥ 18 who were assessed at an outpatient spine clinic from 2013 to 2021 and linked self-reported information with national registry data. We calculated the prevalence of all-cause healthcare utilisation in primary care. Then, we determined changes in the number of consultations from before to after assessment in secondary care using generalised estimating equations.

Results: We included 56,949 LBP patients and 18,926 NTP patients. The baseline characteristics were similar overall. For both LBP and NTP, all-cause healthcare utilisation increased slightly over time, with a substantial increase in the quarter before the secondary care assessment and a decrease after. Before the assessment, almost all patients consulted general practitioners (95%), while some consulted physiotherapists or chiropractors (60%). Overall, consultations decreased by 19% and 17% for patients with LBP and NTP from 12 to 1 month before to 1-12 months after the assessment. In contrast, 13-24 months after assessment, we found a slight increase in consultations in both groups compared to the same period before.

Conclusions: Patients with LBP and NTP were similar and used similar primary healthcare, which slightly increased over the 10 years. As physiotherapists and chiropractors are first-line providers of guideline-recommended spine pain treatment, the finding that 40% did not consult these professions the year before the secondary care assessment indicates that not all patients receive recommended care before referral.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Musculoskeletal Care
Musculoskeletal Care RHEUMATOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
88
期刊介绍: Musculoskeletal Care is a peer-reviewed journal for all health professionals committed to the clinical delivery of high quality care for people with musculoskeletal conditions and providing knowledge to support decision making by professionals, patients and policy makers. This journal publishes papers on original research, applied research, review articles and clinical guidelines. Regular topics include patient education, psychological and social impact, patient experiences of health care, clinical up dates and the effectiveness of therapy.
期刊最新文献
Pain Catastrophizing Is Associated With Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Hip Osteoarthritis: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study. Gaps in Evidence-Based Recommendations for Low Back Pain: Analysis of the Accuracy of the Care Pathway in Primary Care. Knee-Related Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Young Adults: A Scoping Meta-Review. Effect of Motivational Interviewing and Exercise on Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Perspectives of UK Physiotherapists With Expertise in Rheumatology on the Barriers and Facilitators Influencing the Identification of Axial Spondyloarthritis by First Contact Practitioners in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1