OBJECTIVE: To investigate the current treatment policy of general practitioners (GPs) in patients with a lumbosacral radicular syndrome (LRS) compared with their clinical guideline. DESIGN: A cross sectional survey. METHODS: Sixty-three GPs completed questionnaires about their treatment policy in individual LRS patients at baseline and at six months follow-up. Simultaneously, 136 LRS patients of these GPs were interviewed at baseline, and at three and six month's follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 12 recommendations in the guideline related to history taking, four were not adhered to by the GPs in about 25% of the patients. Of the ten recommended physical examinations, three are not frequently carried out by the GPs. Almost 40% of the patients were referred to physiotherapy and 27% received muscle relaxants. CONCLUSION: The majority of the GPs support the content of the LRS guideline. Overall, there was a good adherence with the guideline for history taking and physical examination, and a moderate adherence for treatment policy.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the current treatment policy of general practitioners (GPs) in patients with a lumbosacral radicular syndrome (LRS) compared with their clinical guideline. DESIGN: A cross sectional survey. METHODS: Sixty-three GPs completed questionnaires about their treatment policy in individual LRSpatients at baseline and at six months follow-up. Simultaneously, 136 LRSpatients of these GPs were interviewed at baseline, and at three and six month's follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 12 recommendations in the guideline related to history taking, four were not adhered to by the GPs in about 25% of the patients. Of the ten recommended physical examinations, three are not frequently carried out by the GPs. Almost 40% of the patients were referred to physiotherapy and 27% received muscle relaxants. CONCLUSION: The majority of the GPs support the content of the LRS guideline. Overall, there was a good adherence with the guideline for history taking and physical examination, and a moderate adherence for treatment policy.
Authors: Alexander Chye; Chung-Wei Christine Lin; Mark J Hancock; Ian Harris; Jane Latimer; Christopher G Maher; Andrew J McLachlan; Stephanie Mathieson; Bart Koes; Richard O Day; Laurent Billot; Stephen Jan; Blake Angell Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2020-09-24 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Pim A J Luijsterburg; Arianne P Verhagen; Raymond W J G Ostelo; Hans J M M van den Hoogen; Wilco C Peul; Cees J J Avezaat; Bart W Koes Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2004-11-09 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Antje Spijker-Huiges; Feikje Groenhof; Jan C Winters; Marten van Wijhe; Klaas H Groenier; Klaas van der Meer Journal: Scand J Prim Health Care Date: 2015-02-19 Impact factor: 2.581
Authors: Pim A J Luijsterburg; Arianne P Verhagen; Raymond W J G Ostelo; Hans J M M van den Hoogen; Wilco C Peul; Cees J J Avezaat; Bart W Koes Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2008-01-03 Impact factor: 3.134