Non-Pharmacological Spine Pain Management in Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Systematic Review Using AGREE II and AGREE-REX Tools

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the content and critically appraise the quality and applicability of recent clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for non-pharmacological, non-surgical management of spine pain. DESIGN: Systematic review of CPGs. LITERATURE SEARCH: Six databases and seven guideline clearinghouses. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Included de novo CPGs for non-pharmacological, non-surgical management of spine pain designed for any primary healthcare providers, published in English, Arabic, French, or traditional Chinese within the past 12 years. DATA SYNTHESIS: Five reviewers independently appraised the guidelines using AGREE II and AGREE REX. Inter-rater agreements were calculated for each domain and the total score of these tools using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC [2,1]) with absolute agreement. RESULTS: We included 30 CPGs, primarily (90%) developed in Western countries, which contained 404 recommendations. High-quality CPGs consistently recommended exercise therapy and multimodal care, encompassing a combination of exercises, mobilization/manipulation, education, alternative medicine, and cognitive-behavioral treatments. Generally, CPGs did not recommend assistive (e.g., coresets and orthosis) devices or electro/thermotherapies (e.g., therapeutic ultrasound, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation). Approximately half of the CPGs demonstrated good methodological quality according to AGREE II, while the rest were of poor quality. On the AGREE-REX assessment, one-third of the recommendations were of excellent quality. CONCLUSION: Although recent guidelines frequently recommended exercise therapy and multimodal care for the management of spine pain, their recommendations often overlooked demographics and comorbidities. Despite methodological improvements, most CPGs lacked simple clinical applicability and considerations of knowledge users’ values.