Abstract:Background Low back pain (LBP) is the most common occupational disorder in North America. In the period from 2012 to 2016, indirect costs were US$2.2 billion for LBP in Brazil, accounting for approximately 67% of medical expenses. Previously published studies lacked major interventions, requiring further research to improve the evidence. Findings from this review can raise awareness among clinicians and promote significant savings if they follow clinical guidelines. Objectives To investigate the effectiveness of implementation strategies to reduce the proportion of low-value care and increase the proportion of high-value care in the management of low back pain. Methods This review was registered to the to the Open Science Framework (OSF) (https://osf.io/7jfpr/). Searches were performed in the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library. Two independent reviewers performed study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Clinical trials investigating the effect of evidence-in-practice implementation strategies on reducing low-value care and promoting low-value care were included. Studies including adults with non-specific LBP were considered eligible. The primary outcome of this systematic review was outcomes related to the practices of health professionals. However, the primary outcomes were determined considering two recent clinical care standards. Meta-analyses were calculated using random effect models, the risk of bias by the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the overall quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE). Results Thirty-two articles were included. Interventions focusing on implementing clinical guidelines were not effective in referral to specialists (5 studies, n=6223; RR=0.88; 95% CI: 0.62, 1.25), referral to physical therapists (3 studies, n=7937; RR=1.42 ; 95% CI: 0.74, 2.72) or for prescribing non-opioid drugs (6 studies, n=7297; RR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.52, 1.10) when compared to the control group. However, the implementation of clinical guidelines was effective in reducing the number of imaging requests (12 studies, n= 44,689; RR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.70, 0.99), opioid prescription (5 studies, n=6681; RR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.80), and promote active approaches (exercise, counseling, etc.) (6 studies, n=2553; RR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.76). Confidence of all meta-analyses was low, as most studies were assessed at high risk of bias because they were not randomized clinical trials and because of serious inconsistency (I2 > 50%). Conclusion Although clinical guidelines are important to improve the quality of care for people with LBP, it is not always effective in clinical practice. The quality of evidence found was low. Better quality studies are still needed to confirm these findings. Implications Clinical guidelines are important tools that are effective in reducing imaging, prescribing opioids and promoting active approaches and were ineffective for referrals and prescribing non-opioids.

Does risk stratification with a matched treatment pathway improve clinical outcomes for adults with acute back pain? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Benefits and harms of treatments for chronic nonspecific low back pain without radiculopathy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Cost-effectiveness of Risk Stratified Care vs Usual Care for Low Back Pain in the Military Health System

Prevention strategies to reduce future impact of low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Surgical Versus Nonsurgical Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain: A Meta-Analysis Based on Current Evidence.

Risk-based stratified primary care for common musculoskeletal pain presentations: qualitative findings from the STarT MSK cluster randomised controlled trial

Evaluating the STarTBack stratified treatment approach for low back pain: exploring study-level factors potentially explaining differences in results of studies - a literature review

The clinical course of acute, subacute and persistent low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Umbrella Review of Primary Care Treatments for Adults With Chronic Low Back Pain

Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low back pain: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis

Psychological interventions for chronic non-specific low back pain: protocol of a systematic review with network meta-analysis

Spinal manipulative therapy and exercise for older adults with chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trial

A Stratified Approach for Managing Patients With Low Back Pain in Primary Care : A Before-and-After Study

The McKenzie Method delivered by credentialed therapists for chronic low back pain with directional preference: systematic review with meta-analysis

Physiotherapeutic and non-conventional approaches in patients with chronic low-back pain: a level I Bayesian network meta-analysis

Predictive performance of the STarT Back tool for poor outcomes in patients with low back pain: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Systematic Review to Inform a World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Practice Guideline: Benefits and Harms of Structured and Standardized Education or Advice for Chronic Primary low back pain in Adults

EFFECTIVENESS OF IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES TO REDUCE THE PROPORTION OF LOW-COST CARE FOR LOW-BACK PAIN MANAGEMENT: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW WITH META-ANALYSIS

Risk Factors Associated With Transition From Acute to Chronic Low Back Pain in US Patients Seeking Primary Care

Relative Effectiveness of Different Forms of Exercises for Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain: Protocol for a Systematic Review Incorporating Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

Optimising conservative management of chronic low back pain: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial