Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a progressive, individualised walking and education program for prevention of low back pain recurrence in adults: statistical analysis plan for the WalkBack randomised controlled trial
Tóm tắt
Exercise for the prevention of low back pain recurrences is recommended, but under-researched. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a walking program for preventing low back pain recurrence remains unknown. This a priori statistical analysis plan describes the methods of analysis for the WalkBack trial.
WalkBack is a prospectively registered, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial. The aim is to investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a 6-month progressive and individualised walking and education program (intervention) for the prevention of low back pain recurrences, compared to a no-treatment control group. The primary outcome is days to the first recurrence of an episode of activity-limiting low back pain. Key secondary outcomes include days to any recurrence of low back pain, days to a care-seeking recurrence of low back pain, disability level, health-related quality of life, costs associated with low back pain and adverse events. All participants will be followed for a minimum of 12 months. Analysis will follow the intention-to-treat principle. Cox regression is planned to assess the effects for the outcomes of time to activity-limiting, minimal and care-seeking recurrence. Hazard ratios and median survival times with 95% confidence intervals will be calculated. The effect of the intervention on continuous outcomes will be estimated with repeated-measure linear mixed models. An economic evaluation will be performed from the societal perspective for recurrence prevented (yes/no) and quality-adjusted life years. The proportion of adverse events between groups will be compared using Fisher’s exact test.
The WalkBack trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a walking intervention to prevent low back pain recurrences. This statistical analysis plan provides transparency on the analysis of the trial.
WalkBack - Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a progressive individualised walking and education program for the prevention of a recurrence of low back pain.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
James SL, Abate D, Abate KH, et al. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. The Lancet. 2018;392(10159):1789–858. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32279-7.
Downie AS, Hancock MJ, Rzewuska M, et al. Trajectories of acute low back pain: a latent class growth analysis. Pain. 2016;157(1):225–34. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000351[publishedOnlineFirst:2015/09/24].
da Silva T, Mills K, Brown BT, et al. Recurrence of low back pain is common: a prospective inception cohort study. J Physiother. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphys.2019.04.010.
Steffens D, Maher CG, Pereira LS, et al. Prevention of low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(2):199–208.
de Campos TF, Maher CG, Fuller JT, et al. Prevention strategies to reduce future impact of low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2021;55(9):468–76.
Huang R, Ning J, Chuter VH, et al. Exercise alone and exercise combined with education both prevent episodes of low back pain and related absenteeism: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) aimed at preventing back pain. Br J Sports Med. 2020;54(13):766–70.
Pocovi NC, Lin CWC, Latimer J, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a progressive, individualised walking and education programme for prevention of low back pain recurrence in adults: study protocol for the WalkBack randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2020;10(10):e037149.
Amtmann D, Cook KF, Jensen MP, et al. Development of a PROMIS item bank to measure pain interference. Pain. 2010;150(1):173–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2010.04.025[publishedOnlineFirst:2010/06/18].
Stanton TR, Latimer J, Maher CG, et al. A modified Delphi approach to standardize low back pain recurrence terminology. Eur Spine J. 2011;20(5):744–52.
Roland M, Morris RJS. A study of the natural history of back pain: part I development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1983;8(2):141–4.
Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x[publishedOnlineFirst:2011/04/12].
Xie F, Pullenayegum E, Gaebel K, et al. A time trade-off-derived value set of the EQ-5D-5L for Canada. Med Care. 2016;54(1):98.
Berlin JE, Storti KL, Brach JS. Using activity monitors to measure physical activity in free-living conditions. Phys Ther. 2006;86(8):1137–45. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/86.8.1137.
Troiano RP, Berrigan D, Dodd KW, et al. Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008;40(1):181.
Tudor-Locke C, Ducharme SW, Aguiar EJ, et al. Walking cadence (steps/min) and intensity in 41 to 60-year-old adults: the CADENCE-adults study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020;17(1):1–10.
Lee PH, Macfarlane DJ, Lam TH, et al. Validity of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire Short Form (IPAQ-SF): a systematic review. The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity. 2011;8:115. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-8-115[publishedOnlineFirst:2011/10/25].
International Classification of Diseases Eleventh Revision (ICD-11). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2022. License: CC BY-ND 3.0 IGO. https://icdcdn.who.int/icd11referenceguide/en/html/index.html#copyright-page.
Byerly MJ, Nakonezny PA, Rush AJ. The Brief Adherence Rating Scale (BARS) validated against electronic monitoring in assessing the antipsychotic medication adherence of outpatients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. Schizophr Res. 2008;100(1–3):60–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2007.12.470[publishedOnlineFirst:2008/02/08].
Stanton TR, Henschke N, Maher CG, et al. After an episode of acute low back pain, recurrence is unpredictable and not as common as previously thought. Spine. 2008;33(26):2923–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31818a3167.
Järvinen TL, Sihvonen R, Bhandari M, et al. Blinded interpretation of study results can feasibly and effectively diminish interpretation bias. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(7):769–72.
White IR, Royston P, Wood AM. Multiple imputation using chained equations: issues and guidance for practice. Stat Med. 2011;30(4):377–99.
Manca A, Hawkins N, Sculpher MJ. Estimating mean QALYs in trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis: the importance of controlling for baseline utility. Health Econ. 2005;14(5):487–96.
El Alili M, van Dongen JM, Esser JL, et al. A scoping review of statistical methods for trial-based economic evaluations: the current state of play. Health Econ. 2022;31(12):2680–99.
Clark TG, Altman DG, De Stavola BL. Quantification of the completeness of follow-up. The Lancet. 2002;359(9314):1309–10.
Kasza J. Research Note: estimating the complier average causal effect when participants in randomised trials depart from allocated treatment. J Physiother. 2021;67(2):147–9.
Peugh JL, Strotman D, McGrady M, et al. Beyond intent to treat (ITT): a complier average causal effect (CACE) estimation primer. J Sch Psychol. 2017;60:7–24.