Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ARTICLES
    • Current Issue
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Special Issue Archive
    • Subject Collections
  • INFO FOR
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Call For Papers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • ABOUT
    • The JABFM
    • The Editing Fellowship
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
    • Editors' Blog
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • JABFM on Bluesky
  • JABFM On Facebook
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Specialty Differences in Initial Evaluation of Patients With Non-Acute Musculoskeletal Pain

Lisa C. Carlesso, Debbie Ehrmann Feldman and Richard L. Nahin
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine May 2021, 34 (3) 618-633; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2021.03.200286
Lisa C. Carlesso
From the School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada, School of Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy Program Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada (LCC); School of Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy Program and School of Public Health, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Université de Montréal, Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation, Institute of Public Health Research, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada (DEF); National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD (RLN).
PT, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Debbie Ehrmann Feldman
From the School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada, School of Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy Program Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada (LCC); School of Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy Program and School of Public Health, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Université de Montréal, Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation, Institute of Public Health Research, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada (DEF); National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD (RLN).
PT, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Richard L. Nahin
From the School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada, School of Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy Program Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada (LCC); School of Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy Program and School of Public Health, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Université de Montréal, Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation, Institute of Public Health Research, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada (DEF); National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD (RLN).
MPH, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Vos T,
    2. Abajobir AA,
    3. Abate KH,
    4. et al
    . Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 328 diseases and injuries for 195 countries, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet 2017;390:1211–59.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Briggs AM,
    2. Cross MJ,
    3. March L,
    4. et al
    . Musculoskeletal health conditions represent a global threat to healthy aging: a report for the 2015 World Health Organization World Report on Ageing and Health. Geront 2016;56:S243–S255.
    OpenUrl
  3. 3.↵
    1. Manchikanti L,
    2. Kaye AM,
    3. Knezevic NN,
    4. et al
    . Responsible, safe, and effective prescription of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) guidelines. Pain Physician 2017;20:S3–S92.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Dale R,
    2. Stacey B
    . Multimodal treatment of chronic pain. Med Clin North Am 2016;100:55–64.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    1. Cheatle MD
    . Biopsychosocial approach to assessing and managing patients with chronic pain. Med Clin North Am 2016;100:43–53.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Chou R,
    2. Fanciullo GJ,
    3. Fine PG
    , American Pain Society-American Academy of Pain Medicine Opioids Guidelines Panel, et al. Clinical guidelines for the use of chronic opioid therapy in chronic noncancer pain. J Pain 2009;10:113–30.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. 7.↵
    National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Neuropathic pain: the pharmacological management of neuropathic pain in adults in non-specialist settings. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg173. Accessed October 16, 2019.
  8. 8.↵
    Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Management of chronic pain. https://www.sign.ac.uk/sign-136-management-of-chronic-pain. Accessed October 16, 2018.
  9. 9.↵
    1. Lin I,
    2. Wiles L,
    3. Waller R,
    4. et al
    . What does best practice care for musculoskeletal pain look like? Eleven consistent recommendations from high-quality clinical practice guidelines: systematic review. Br J Sports Med 2020;54:79–86.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Wisely C
    . Imaging tests for lower-back pain. https://www.choosingwisely.org/patient-resources/imaging-tests-for-back-pain/. Accessed August 17, 2020.
  11. 11.↵
    1. Gyftopoulos S,
    2. Harkey P,
    3. Hemingway J,
    4. Hughes DR,
    5. Rosenkrantz AB,
    6. Duszak R Jr.
    . Changing musculoskeletal extremity imaging utilization from 1994 through 2013: a Medicare beneficiary perspective. Am J Roentgenol 2017;209:1103–9.
    OpenUrl
  12. 12.↵
    1. Kroenke K,
    2. Strine TW,
    3. Spitzer RL,
    4. Williams JB,
    5. Berry JT,
    6. Mokdad AH
    . The PHQ-8 as a measure of current depression in the general population. J Affect Disord 2009;114:163–73.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  13. 13.↵
    1. Bhattacharjee S,
    2. Goldstone L,
    3. Vadiei N,
    4. Lee JK,
    5. Burke WJ
    . Depression screening patterns, predictors, and trends among adults without a depression diagnosis in ambulatory settings in the United States. PS 2018;69:1098–100.
    OpenUrl
  14. 14.↵
    1. IsHak WW,
    2. Wen RY,
    3. Naghdechi L,
    4. et al
    . Pain and depression: a systematic review. Harv Rev Psychiatry 2018;26:352–63.
    OpenUrl
  15. 15.↵
    1. Dhanju S,
    2. Kennedy SH,
    3. Abbey S,
    4. et al
    . The impact of comorbid pain and depression in the United States: results from a nationally representative survey. Scandinavian J Pain 2019;19:319–25.
    OpenUrl
  16. 16.↵
    1. Abdulla A,
    2. Adams N,
    3. Bone M
    , British Geriatric Society, et al. Guidance on the management of pain in older people. Age Ageing 2013;42 Suppl 1:11–57.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Sambamoorthi U,
    2. Shah D,
    3. Zhao X
    . Healthcare burden of depression in adults with arthritis. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2017;17:53–65.
    OpenUrl
  18. 18.↵
    1. Thompson DP,
    2. Urmston M,
    3. Oldham JA,
    4. Woby SR
    . The association between cognitive factors, pain and disability in patients with idiopathic chronic neck pain. Disabil Rehabil 2010;32:1758–67.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Hirsh AT,
    2. Hollingshead NA,
    3. Bair MJ,
    4. Matthias MS,
    5. Wu J,
    6. Kroenke K
    . The influence of patient's sex, race and depression on clinician pain treatment decisions. Eur J Pain 2013;17:1569–79.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Boscarino JA,
    2. Rukstalis M,
    3. Hoffman SN,
    4. et al
    . Risk factors for drug dependence among out-patients on opioid therapy in a large US health-care system. Addiction 2010;105:1776–82.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. 21.↵
    1. Hawker GA,
    2. Gignac MA,
    3. Badley E,
    4. et al
    . A longitudinal study to explain the pain-depression link in older adults with osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2011;63:1382–90.
    OpenUrl
  22. 22.↵
    1. Robinson RL,
    2. Grabner M,
    3. Palli SR,
    4. Faries D,
    5. Stephenson JJ
    . Covariates of depression and high utilizers of healthcare: impact on resource use and costs. J Psychosom Res 2016;85:35–43.
    OpenUrl
  23. 23.↵
    1. Gilchrist VJ,
    2. Stange KC,
    3. Flocke SA,
    4. McCord G,
    5. Bourguet CC
    . A comparison of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) measurement approach with direct observation of outpatient visits. Med Care 2004;42:276–80.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  24. 24.↵
    1. Hing E,
    2. Shimizu IM,
    3. Talwalkar A
    . Nonresponse bias in estimates from the 2012 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Vital Health Stat. 2016;2:1–42.
    OpenUrl
  25. 25.↵
    1. Hing E,
    2. Schappert SM,
    3. Burt CW,
    4. Shimizu IM
    . Effects of form length and item format on response patterns and estimates of physician office and hospital outpatient department visits. National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Vital Health Stat 2001;2:1–32.
    OpenUrl
  26. 26.↵
    1. Berkowitz Z,
    2. Nair N,
    3. Saraiya M
    . Providers' practice, recommendations and beliefs about HPV vaccination and their adherence to guidelines about the use of HPV testing, 2007 to 2010. Prev Med 2016;87:128–31.
    OpenUrl
  27. 27.↵
    1. Scheel JR,
    2. Hippe DS,
    3. Chen LE,
    4. et al
    . Are physicians influenced by their own specialty society's guidelines regarding mammography screening? An analysis of nationally representative data. Am J Roentgenol 2016;207:959–64.
    OpenUrl
  28. 28.↵
    1. Wallace AE,
    2. MacKenzie TA,
    3. Weeks WB
    . Women's primary care providers and breast cancer screening: who's following the guidelines? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;194:744–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Bryant E,
    2. Shimizu I
    . Sample design, sampling variance, and estimation procedures for the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Vital Health Stat 1988;108:88–1382.
    OpenUrl
  30. 30.↵
    NCHS. 2015 NAMCS micro-data file documentation.
  31. 31.↵
    1. Tenney JB,
    2. White KL,
    3. Williamson JW
    . National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, background and methodology, United States, 1967–72. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office; 1974.
  32. 32.↵
    1. Tompkins L,
    2. Shirnizu IM
    . Sample design research for the 1985 NAMCS.
  33. 33.↵
    NCHS. 2011 National Center for Health Statistics. National Ambulatory Mediacl Care Survey 2011 Panel Questionnaire (From NAMCS-1; pp 16–17).
  34. 34.↵
    1. Halley MC,
    2. Rendle KA,
    3. Gugerty B,
    4. Lau DT,
    5. Luft HS,
    6. Gillespie KA
    . Collecting practice-level data in a changing physician office-based ambulatory care environment: a pilot study examining the physician induction interview component of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Vital Health Stat 2017;2:1–18.
    OpenUrl
  35. 35.↵
    1. Treede R,
    2. Rief W,
    3. Barke A,
    4. et al
    . Chronic pain as a symptom or a disease: the IASP Classification of Chronic Pain for the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). Pain 2019;160:19–27.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    IASP. World Health Assembly of the WHO approves 11th version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), including new diagnostic codes for chronic pain. http://s3.amazonaws.com/rdcms-iasp/files/production/public/ICD11%20Press%20Release_3June2019.pdf. Accessed July 19, 2019.
  37. 37.↵
    1. Oliveira CB,
    2. Maher CG,
    3. Pinto RZ,
    4. et al
    . Clinical practice guidelines for the management of non-specific low back pain in primary care: an updated overview. Eur Spine J 2018;27:2791–803.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. 38.↵
    1. Carey TS,
    2. Freburger JK,
    3. Holmes GM,
    4. et al
    . Care seeking, and utilization for chronic back and neck pain: population perspectives. J Pain 2010;11:343–50.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    1. Borkhoff CM,
    2. Hawker GA,
    3. Kreder HJ,
    4. Glazier RH,
    5. Mahomed NN,
    6. Wright JG
    . Influence of patients' gender on informed decision making regarding total knee arthroplasty. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2013;65:1281–90.
    OpenUrl
  40. 40.↵
    1. Razmjou H,
    2. Lincoln S,
    3. Macritchie I,
    4. Richards RR,
    5. Medeiros D,
    6. Elmaraghy A
    . Sex and gender disparity in pathology, disability, referral pattern, and wait time for surgery in workers with shoulder injury. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2016;17:401.
    OpenUrl
  41. 41.↵
    1. Verbrugge LM,
    2. Steiner RP
    . Physician treatment of men and women patients: sex bias or appropriate care? Med Care 1981;19:609–32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  42. 42.↵
    1. Roberts TT,
    2. Singer N,
    3. Hushmendy S,
    4. et al
    . MRI for the evaluation of knee pain: comparison of ordering practices of primary care physicians and orthopaedic surgeons. J. Bone Joint Surg Am 2015;97:709–14.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. 43.↵
    1. Darlow B,
    2. Forster BB,
    3. Sullivan K,
    4. Sullivan P
    . It is time to stop causing harm with inappropriate imaging for low back pain? Br J Sports Med 2017;51:414–5.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    1. Emery DJ,
    2. Shojania KG,
    3. Forster AJ,
    4. Mojaverian N,
    5. Feasby TE
    . Overuse of magnetic resonance imaging. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173:823–5.
    OpenUrl
  45. 45.↵
    1. Jenkins HJ,
    2. Moloney NA,
    3. French SD,
    4. et al
    . Using behaviour change theory and preliminary testing to develop an implementation intervention to reduce imaging for low back pain. BMC Health Serv Res 2018;18:734.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. 46.↵
    Canadian Cancer Society. Complete blood count. http://www.cancer.ca/en/cancer-information/diagnosis-and-treatment/tests-and-procedures/complete-blood-count-cbc/?region=on Accessed May 1, 2019.
  47. 47.↵
    1. Mabry LM,
    2. Ross MD,
    3. Tonarelli JM
    . Metastatic cancer mimicking mechanical low back pain: a case report. J Man Manip Ther 2014;22:162–9.
    OpenUrl
  48. 48.↵
    1. Del Rincón I,
    2. Battafarano DF,
    3. Arroyo RA,
    4. Murphy FT,
    5. Fischbach M,
    6. Escalante A
    . Ethnic variation in the clinical manifestations of rheumatoid arthritis: role of HLA-DRB1 alleles. Arthritis Rheum 2003;49:200–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  49. 49.↵
    1. Løge-Hagen JS,
    2. Sæle A,
    3. Juhl C,
    4. Bech P,
    5. Stenager E,
    6. Mellentin AI
    . Prevalence of depressive disorder among patients with fibromyalgia: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord 2019;245:1098–105.
    OpenUrl
  50. 50.↵
    1. Caruso R,
    2. Ostuzzi G,
    3. Turrini G,
    4. et al
    . Beyond pain: can antidepressants improve depressive symptoms and quality of life in patients with neuropathic pain? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain 2019;160:2186–98.
    OpenUrl
  51. 51.↵
    1. Feldman DE,
    2. Carlesso LC,
    3. Nahin RL
    . Management of patients with a musculoskeletal pain condition that is likely chronic: results from a national cross sectional survey. J Pain 2020;21:869–80.
    OpenUrl
  52. 52.↵
    1. Rasu RS,
    2. Sohraby R,
    3. Cunningham L,
    4. Knell ME
    . Assessing chronic pain treatment practices and evaluating adherence to chronic pain clinical guidelines in outpatient practices in the United States. J Pain 2013;14:568–78.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. 53.↵
    1. You JJ,
    2. Levinson W,
    3. Laupacis A
    . Attitudes of family physicians, specialists and radiologists about the use of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in Ontario. Healthc Policy 2009;5:54–65.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  54. 54.↵
    Institute of Medicine Committee on Advancing Pain Research, Care, and Education. Relieving pain in America: a blueprint for transforming prevention, care, education, and research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of the American Board of Family     Medicine: 34 (3)
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Vol. 34, Issue 3
May/June 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Board of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Specialty Differences in Initial Evaluation of Patients With Non-Acute Musculoskeletal Pain
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Board of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Board of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
7 + 1 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Specialty Differences in Initial Evaluation of Patients With Non-Acute Musculoskeletal Pain
Lisa C. Carlesso, Debbie Ehrmann Feldman, Richard L. Nahin
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine May 2021, 34 (3) 618-633; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2021.03.200286

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Specialty Differences in Initial Evaluation of Patients With Non-Acute Musculoskeletal Pain
Lisa C. Carlesso, Debbie Ehrmann Feldman, Richard L. Nahin
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine May 2021, 34 (3) 618-633; DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2021.03.200286
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Appendix
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • COVID-19 Pandemic Practices, Payment Models, and Publication Successes: Family Medicine Studies a Variety of Primary Care Questions
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Integrating Adverse Childhood Experiences and Social Risks Screening in Adult Primary Care
  • A Pilot Comparison of Clinical Data Collection Methods Using Paper, Electronic Health Record Prompt, and a Smartphone Application
  • Associations Between Modifiable Preconception Care Indicators and Pregnancy Outcomes
Show more Original Research

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Chronic Pain
  • Connective Tissue
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Health Care Surveys
  • Musculoskeletal Pain
  • Primary Health Care

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us
  • ABFM News

© 2025 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire