The aim of this systematic review was to determine the attitudes and beliefs of doctors to acute low back pain, and the factors that influence these. The review comprised three phases: a methodological assessment of databases (Medline, EMBASE, Psychinfo, BIOSIS, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) identified potential papers; these were screened for inclusion criteria by two independent reviewers, the extraction of data and the rating of internal validity and strength of the evidence, using valid and reliable scales from accepted papers. Themes were then identified from the accepted literature. The search generated a total of 15 papers of both qualitative (n=3) and quantitative (n=12) methodologies. Themes that emerged included doctors' attitudes and beliefs, and four factors that influenced attitudes and beliefs: doctors' specialty, demographic factors, personal beliefs and education. There was consistent evidence that doctors' specialty impacted their attitudes and beliefs: lack of consensus regarding the natural history of LBP, around treatment options, and issues regarding work. There was inconsistent evidence that demographic factors (age) and level of education impacted doctors' attitudes and beliefs. Strategies to address/ modify these attitudes and beliefs are required, as in some cases they are at odds with guideline recommendations. Long term, these changes in these areas have the potential to maximise patient-care, and reduce costs to health services.

BACKGROUND: The management of cystic fibrosis (CF) includes adherence to a home management program (airway clearance, medication, nutritional advice, and exercise). This has led to an increase in life expectancy, although the benefits depend greatly on a patient's level of adherence to daily treatments at home. To date, no systematic review has established adherence rates to all World Health Organization guidelines in the home setting; hence, this review was undertaken. METHODS: The review comprised 3 phases. A methodological assessment of databases (Embase, CINAHL, PsychINFO, PEDro, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) identified potentially relevant papers. These papers were screened for inclusion criteria by 2 independent reviewers, data were extracted, and the internal validity was rated using a valid and reliable scale. Results were categorized into 4 themes: medication, nutrition, airway clearance techniques, and exercise. RESULTS: The search generated a total of 26 papers, 24 of which were rated as being poor quality. Adherence to a treatment program for CF patients is generally low (from 22% for nutritional guidelines to 130% for oral antibiotics), and it varies greatly depending on the type of treatment and the method of assessment employed (objective tool vs self-reported questionnaires). CONCLUSIONS: Consensus on how to measure adherence is lacking, and the quality of studies addressing adherence in this population is generally poor. Overall, studies using self-reported measures yielded higher adherence scores than those that used objective measures, suggesting that current efforts to improve methods of adherence are appropriate. The prevalence of non-adherence remains unclear due to these limitations.