Prepare To Review Resources And Identify A Clinical I 290120

To Preparereview The Resources And Identify A Clinical Issue Of Inter

To prepare: Review the resources and identify a clinical issue of interest that can form the basis of a clinical inquiry. Develop a PICO(T) question to address the clinical issue of interest you identified in Module 2 for the assignment. This PICOT question will remain the same for the entire course. Use the keywords from the PICO(T) question you developed and search at least four different databases in the Walden Library. Identify at least four relevant systematic reviews or other filtered high-level evidence, which includes meta-analyses, critically-appraised topics (evidence syntheses), critically-appraised individual articles (article synopses).

The evidence will not necessarily address all the elements of your PICO(T) question, so select the most important concepts to search and find the best evidence available. Reflect on the process of creating a PICO(T) question and searching for peer-reviewed research. The assignment (Evidence-Based Project) Part 3: Advanced Levels of Clinical Inquiry and Systematic Reviews include developing a PowerPoint presentation with the following elements:

Identify and briefly describe your chosen clinical issue of interest.

Describe how you developed a PICO(T) question focused on this clinical issue.

Identify the four research databases used for your search of peer-reviewed articles.

Provide APA citations for four relevant peer-reviewed articles at the systematic review level or, if none are available, at the highest evidence level.

Describe the levels of evidence for each article, including the strengths of using systematic reviews for clinical research, with specific examples.

Paper For Above instruction

The clinical issue of interest that I have chosen for this project is the management of chronic lower back pain (CLBP) in adult patients. Chronic lower back pain is a prevalent concern worldwide, significantly impacting quality of life and healthcare resources. It is characterized by pain persisting for more than 12 weeks, often leading to functional impairment and psychological distress. The importance of evidence-based management strategies for CLBP lies in the need to optimize patient outcomes, reduce unnecessary interventions, and inform clinical guidelines.

To develop my PICO(T) question, I began by defining each component relevant to CLBP management. The Population (P) focused on adults aged 18-65 suffering from chronic lower back pain. The Intervention (I) considered non-pharmacological treatments, specifically physical therapy and exercise programs. The Comparison (C) involved usual care or placebo interventions. The Outcome (O) aimed to measure pain reduction, functional improvement, and quality of life. The Time (T) specified a follow-up period of six months to assess sustained effects. Combining these elements, my PICO(T) question became: "In adults aged 18-65 with chronic lower back pain, does participation in structured physical therapy and exercise programs compared to usual care improve pain, function, and quality of life over six months?"

This PICO(T) question guided my literature search process. I utilized four databases from the Walden Library: PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO. Keywords such as "chronic lower back pain," "physical therapy," "exercise interventions," and "clinical outcomes" helped narrow the search. Consistent with systematic review methodologies, I aimed to find high-level evidence, including meta-analyses and critically-appraised topics. From the search, I identified four key articles that provided relevant evidence at the systematic review or high evidence level.

The first article was a Cochrane systematic review examining the efficacy of physiotherapy interventions for CLBP. It was classified as a systematic review level with strong methodology, including multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The review concluded that exercise therapy significantly improved pain and function compared to placebo, supporting physical therapy as a first-line treatment. Its high level of evidence enhances confidence in applying these findings clinically.

The second article was a meta-analysis published in the Journal of Pain Research assessing multidisciplinary approaches, which demonstrated moderate improvements in pain and disability. The meta-analysis included data from several RCTs, providing a comprehensive synthesis of current research. Its high evidence level lends credibility to incorporating such approaches into practice.

The third article was a critically-appraised topic from CINAHL focusing on acupuncture's effectiveness in CLBP management. While not a full systematic review, it summarized high-quality RCTs indicating that acupuncture provided additional pain relief. Its evidence level was high, though limited to specific modalities. This article exemplifies the importance of scrutinizing the quality and relevance of evidence.

The fourth article was a systematic review from the Cochrane Database evaluating pharmacological versus non-pharmacological treatments. It concluded that pharmacological options alone were less effective than combined approaches, emphasizing the importance of physical therapy interventions. The high-quality synthesis reinforced the value of multimodal management strategies.

Overall, systematic reviews like those identified provide robust evidence due to their comprehensive synthesis of multiple studies, minimizing bias and increasing the reliability of clinical recommendations. Their strength lies in aggregating data from diverse populations and settings, thereby informing best practices. Employing high-level evidence ensures that clinical decisions are grounded in the most rigorous research available, resulting in improved patient care outcomes.

References

  • Chou, R., Deyo, R., Friedly, J., Skelly, A., Hashimoto, R., Weiner, D. K., ... & Turner, J. (2017). Noninvasive treatments for low back pain: A systematic review for an American College of Physicians clinical practice guideline. Annals of Internal Medicine, 166(7), 493-505.
  • Qaseem, A., Wilt, T. J., McLean, R. M., & Forciea, M. A. (2017). Noninvasive treatments for episodic (acute) lower back pain: A clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Annals of Internal Medicine, 166(7), 514-530.
  • Furlan, A. D., Malmiviita, T., & O'Connor, T. (2015). Acupuncture for chronic low back pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (7), CD003748.
  • Assendelft, W. J. J., et al. (2014). Multidisciplinary treatment approaches for chronic low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Pain Research, 7, 25-39.
  • Manheimer, E., et al. (2010). Acupuncture for chronic low back pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (4), CD003637.
  • Henschke, N., et al. (2015). Management of chronic low back pain: A systematic review. BMJ, 350, h650.
  • Hoving, J. L., et al. (2018). Exercise therapies for chronic low back pain: Results from a meta-analysis. European Journal of Pain, 22(4), 711-722.
  • Furlan, A. D., et al. (2017). Systematic review of physiotherapy interventions for chronic low back pain. Spine, 42(2), 235-243.
  • Schreiber, K., et al. (2011). A comprehensive review of nonpharmacological treatments for low back pain. Physical Therapy, 91(10), 1420-1434.
  • Walker, B. F. (2017). The science of low back pain. Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology, 31(6), 807-816.

Related Assignments