How low back pain is managed—a mixed-methods study in 32 countries. Part 2 of low back pain in low- and middle-income countries series

Sharma, SaurabPathak, AnupaParker, RomyCosta, Leonardo Oliveira PenaGhai, BabitaIgwesi-Chidobe, ChinonsoJanwantanakul, PrawitDe Jesus-Moraleida, Fabianna ResendeChala, Mulugeta BayisaPourahmadi, MohammadrezaBriggs, Andrew M.Gorgon, EdwardArdern, ClareKhan, Karim M.McAuley, James H.Alghwiri, Alia A.Aoko, Oluwayomi AboladeBadamasi, Habibu SalisuCalvache, Jose A.Cardosa, Mary SumaGanesh, ShankarGashaw, MogesGhiringhelli, JohannaGigena, SantiagoHasan, A.T.M. TanveerHaq, Syed AtiqulNg’wiza, Jacob EmmanuelJanse van Rensburg, Dina ChristinaKossi, OyénéLiu, ChangMalani, RinkleMason, Brett James NairnNajem, CharbelNava-Bringas, Tania InesNduwimana, IldephonsePerera, RomainPerveen, WajidaPierobon, AndrésPinto, Emília,Pinto, Rafael Z.Purwanto, FirmansyahRahimi, Mohammad DawoodReis, Felipe J.J.Siddiq, Md Abu BakarShrestha, DipakTamang, MonuVasanthan, T. LennyViljoen, Carel Thomas2025-01-232025-01-232024-08Sharma, Saurab, Pathak, A., Parker, R., et al. 2024, 'How low back pain is managed—a mixed-methods study in 32 countries. Part 2 of low back pain in low- and middle-income countries series', Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, vol. 54, no. 8, pp. 560-572, doi : 10.2519/jospt.2024.12406.0190-6011 (print)1938-1344 (online)10.2519/jospt.2024.12406http://hdl.handle.net/2263/100256DATA SHARING: Data are available from the corresponding author at saurabsharma1@gmail.com upon reasonable request.BACKGROUND: The Lancet Low Back Pain (LBP) Series highlighted the lack of LBP data from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The study aimed to describe (1) what LBP care is currently delivered in LMICs and (2) how that care is delivered. DESIGN: An online mixed-methods study. METHODS: A Consortium for LBP in LMICs (n = 65) was developed with an expert panel of leading LBP researchers (>2 publications on LBP) and multidisciplinary clinicians and patient partners with 5 years of clinical/lived LBP experience in LMICs. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Two researchers independently analyzed qualitative data using inductive and deductive coding and developed a thematic framework. RESULTS: Forty-seven (85%) of 55 invited panel members representing 32 LMICs completed the survey (38% women, 62% men). The panel included clinicians (34%), researchers (28%), educators (6%), and people with lived experience (4%). Pharmacotherapies and electrophysiological agents were the most used LBP treatments. The thematic framework comprised 8 themes: (1) self-management is ubiquitous, (2) medicines are the cornerstone, (3) traditional therapies have a place, (4) society plays an important role, (5) imaging use is very common, (6) reliance on passive approaches, (7) social determinants influence LBP care pathway, and (8) health systems are ill-prepared to address LBP burden. CONCLUSION: LBP care in LMICs did not consistently align with the best available evidence. Findings will help research prioritization in LMICs and guide global LBP clinical guidelines.en© 2024 The Authors. Published by JOSPT Inc. d/b/a Movement Science Media. Original content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.Low back pain (LBP)Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)SDG-03: Good health and well-beingTreatment practicesHow low back pain is managed—a mixed-methods study in 32 countries. Part 2 of low back pain in low- and middle-income countries seriesArticle