Person-centred education and advice for people with low back pain: Making the best of what we know

BackgroundThe first-line treatment consistently recommended for people with low back pain is patient education and advice. Regardless of the duration of low back pain, clinicians should provide education on the benign nature of low back pain, reassurance about the absence of a serious medical condition, and advice to remain active. There is little guidance on how best to provide this care.ObjectiveThis Masterclass will draw on recent evidence to explore how physical therapy clinicians could deliver person-centred education and advice to people with low back pain to refine their clinical consultation.DiscussionFirst, we highlight the potential value of providing validation to acknowledge the distressing experience and consequences of low back pain. Second, we describe a tool to open channels of communication to provide education and advice in a patient-centred and efficient way. Clinicians could consider using the Attitude toward Education and advice for Low back pain Questionnaire to gain an insight into patient attitudes toward education and advice at the outset of a clinical encounter. Finally, we provide options for tailoring patient education and advice to promote self-management of low back pain based on patient attitudes. We present evidence that a positive attitude toward messages about causes rather than messages about physical activity predicts intention to self-manage low back pain. We combine this evidence to suggest a pathway for clinicians to provide education and advice to people with low back pain within the time constraints of a clinical consultation.     

The effects of patient–professional partnerships on the self-management and health outcomes for patients with chronic back pain: A quasi-experimental study

BackgroundSelf-management may be a lifelong task for patients with chronic back pain. Research suggests that chronic pain self-management programmes have beneficial effects on patients’ health outcome. Contemporary pain management theories and models also suggest that a good patient–professional partnership enhances patients’ ability to self-manage their condition.Objectives(1) To investigate whether there is a reciprocal relationship between self-management of chronic back pain and health-related quality of life (HRQoL); (2) to examine the impact of a good patient–professional partnership on HRQoL, either directly, or indirectly via change in the ability to self-manage pain.Design and settingThis quasi-experimental study was designed to take place during routine service appointments and conducted in a community-based pain management service in the United Kingdom. A patient–professional partnership was established in which patients were actively involved in setting up goals and developing individualised care plans. Through this, health professionals undertook patients’ health needs assessment, collaborated with patients to identify specific problems, provided written materials and delivered individualised exercise based on patients’ life situation. Patients were recruited following initial consultation and followed up three months later.ParticipantsA total of 147 patients (65% female) with a mean age of 48 years (standard deviation (SD): 14 years) were enrolled in the study. Of these, 103 subjects completed the study. Patients were included if they were aged 18 and over, suffered from chronic back pain, had opted in to the clinic and had sufficient ability to read and understand English. Patients were excluded if they opted out this service after the initial assessment, suffered from malignant pain or required acute medical interventions for their pain relief.MethodsSelf-reported measures of HRQoL, patient–professional partnerships and self-management ability were collected at baseline and three months later. Pathways proposed were depicted using structural equation modelling.ResultsThere was no association between patients’ self-management ability and HRQoL at baseline. However, a positive direct effect was detected at three months (−0.38, p < 0.01). A patient–professional partnership was not found to be beneficial for patients’ HRQoL through a direct pathway, but via an indirect pathway where self-management was a mediator (−19.09, p < 0.01).ConclusionsThis study suggests that the increase in patients’ self-management ability may lead to improvement in HRQoL after pain management support provided in a partnership with health professionals. A good patient–professional partnership appears to be beneficial as an augmentation to self-management practice for patients with chronic back pain.     

Challenges of self-management when living with multiple chronic conditions: Systematic review of the qualitative literature

ObjectiveTo explore the perspectives of patients who live with multiple chronic conditions as they relate to the challenges of self-management.SynthesisImportant themes raised by people living with multiple chronic conditions related to their ability to self-manage included living with undesirable physical and emotional symptoms, with pain and depression highlighted. Issues with conflicting knowledge, access to care, and communication with health care providers were raised. The use of cognitive strategies, including reframing, prioritizing, and changing beliefs, was reported to improve people’s ability to self-manage their multiple chronic conditions.ConclusionThis study provides a unique view into patients’ perspectives of living with multiple chronic conditions, which are clearly linked to common functional challenges as opposed to specific diseases. Future policy and programming in self-management support should be better aligned with patients’ perspectives on living with multiple chronic conditions. This might be achieved by ensuring a more patient-centred approach is adopted by providers and health service organizations.     

The self-management experience of people with mild to moderate chronic kidney disease.

This qualitative, exploratory study examined the self-management experiences of people with mild to moderate chronic kidney disease (CKD, Stages 1-3) to elicit participants' perceptions of health, kidney disease, and supports needed for self-management. Findings revealed a process of renegotiating life with chronic kidney disease, which encompassed Discovering Kidney Disease and Learning To Live With Kidney Disease. A number of themes were identified including searching for evidence, realizing kidney disease is forever, managing the illness, taking care of the self and the need for disease-specific information. The findings indicate participants with early CKD want to self-manage their illness in collaboration with health care providers. As well, people with early CKD need guidance and support from health professionals to successfully self-manage. Nephrology nurses are uniquely positioned to provide this support while collaborating with other care providers to facilitate self-management.     

Persistent back pain – why do physical therapy clinicians continue treatment? A mixed methods study of chiropractors,osteopaths and physiotherapists

AIMS: (a) To investigate how widespread is the use of long term treatment without improvement amongst clinicians treating individuals with low back pain. (b) To study the beliefs behind the reasons why chiropractors, osteopaths and physiotherapists continue to treat people whose low back pain appears not to be improving. METHODS: A mixed methods study, including a questionnaire survey and qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews. Questionnaire survey; 354/600 (59%) clinicians equally distributed between chiropractic, osteopathy and physiotherapy professions. Interview study; a purposive sample of fourteen clinicians from each profession identified from the survey responses. Methodological techniques ranged from grounded theory analysis to sorting of categories by both the research team and the subjects themselves. RESULTS: At least 10% of each of the professions reported that they continued to treat patients with low back pain who showed almost no improvement for over three months. There is some indication that this is an underestimate. reasons for continuing unsuccessful management of low back pain were not found to be primarily monetary in nature; rather it appears to have much more to do with the scope of care that extends beyond issues addressed in the current physical therapy guidelines. The interview data showed that clinicians viewed their role as including health education and counselling rather than a 'cure or refer' approach. Additionally, participants raised concerns that discharging patients from their care meant sending them to into a therapeutic void. CONCLUSION: Long-term treatment of patients with low back pain without objective signs of improvement is an established practice in a minority of clinicians studied. This approach contrasts with clinical guidelines that encourage self-management, reassurance, re-activation, and involvement of multidisciplinary teams for patients who do not recover. Some of the rationale provided makes a strong case for ongoing contact. However, the practice is also maintained through poor communication with other professions and mistrust of the healthcare system.     

How Individuals With Low Back Pain Conceptualize Their Condition: A Collaborative Modeling Approach

Low back pain (LBP) is complex. This study aimed to use collaborative modeling to evaluate conceptual models that individuals with LBP have of their condition, and to compare these models with those of researchers/clinicians. Twenty-eight individuals with LBP were facilitated to generate mental models, using “fuzzy cognitive maps,” that represented conceptualization of their own LBP and LBP “in general.” “Components” (ie, causes, outcomes and treatments) related to pain, disability and quality of life were proposed, along with the weighted “Connections” between Components. Components were classified into thematic categories. Weighting of Connections were summed for each Component to judge relative importance. Individual models were aggregated into a metamodel. When considering their own condition, participants’ models included 19(SD = 6) Components and 43(18) Connections with greatest weight on “Biomechanical” components. When considering LBP in general, models changed slightly. Patient models contrasted the more complex models of researchers/clinicians (25(7) Components; 77(42) Connections), with most weight on “Psychological” components. This study provides unique insight into how individuals with LBP consider their condition, which is largely biomedical and narrower than clinician/researcher perspectives. Findings highlight challenges for changing public perception of LBP, and provide a method with potential utility to understand how individuals conceptualize their condition.PerspectiveCollaborative modeling was used to understand how individuals with low back pain conceptualize their own condition, the condition in general, and compare this with models of expert researchers/clinicians. Data revealed issues in how individuals with back pain conceptualize their condition, and the method's potential utility for clinical evaluation of patients.     

Assessing health empowerment - Brazilian cross-cultural adaptation and validity testing of the health education impact questionnaire (heiQ) among people with chronic low back pain

BackgroundThere is no patient reported outcome measure available in Brazilian Portuguese to comprehensively assess outcomes following administration of patient education programs for people with chronic conditions.ObjectiveTo describe the cross-cultural adaptation and measurement properties of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Health Education Impact Questionnaire (heiQ), a multidimensional questionnaire designed for the evaluation of patient education programs, which was tested in people with chronic low back pain (LBP).MethodsOne hundred thirty-seven individuals with non-specific chronic LBP (age: 38.7 ± 13.2) were enrolled in the study. The translation was performed according to international standards. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess test-retest reliability, Cronbach’s α to assess internal consistency, Pearson rank correlation to compare the heiQ scales with comparator scales, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for structural validity.ResultsThe test-retest analysis yielded ICC values ranging from 0.75 to 0.91. Cronbach’s alphas for the seven scales ranged from 0.70 to 0.89. Significant correlations between affective and general health constructs and the heiQ scales (72%) were observed. For the majority of the scales, the CFA fit statistics showed to be good to excellent.ConclusionOverall, the Brazilian Portuguese version of the heiQ showed acceptable reliability, internal consistency, construct validity, and structural validity in individuals with chronic LBP. The heiQ scales may serve as direct outcomes to assess education and self-management programs for the Brazilian Portuguese speaker population.     

Chiropractic Care of Adults With Postpartum-Related Low Back,Pelvic Girdle,or Combination Pain: A Systematic Review

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review (SR) of the literature to assess the effectiveness of specific chiropractic care options commonly used for postpartum low back pain (LBP), pelvic girdle pain (PGP), or combination (LBP and PGP) pain.MethodsA search strategy was developed. Interventions were those manual or other nonpharmacologic therapies commonly used by chiropractors (not requiring additional certifications). The outcomes were self-reported changes in pain or disability self-reported outcomes. We used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network checklists. Strength of the evidence (excluding cohort studies) was determined using an adapted version of the US Preventive Services Task Force criteria as described in the UK report.ResultsOf the 1611 published articles, 16 were included. These were 5 SRs, 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 1 cohort study. Postpartum LBP (1 RCT): moderate, favorable strength for spinal manipulation therapy/mobilization. Postpartum PGP (4 RCTs): moderate, unclear strength for exercise; and inconclusive, unclear strength for patient education. Postpartum LBP or PGP (3 SRs and 4 RCTs): inconclusive, unclear strength for exercise, self-management, and physiotherapy; while osteopathic manipulative therapy was inconclusive, favorable.ConclusionNo treatment option was identified as having sufficient evidence to make a clear recommendation. This SR identified a scarcity of literature regarding chiropractic care and back pain for postpartum women, as well as inconsistency among the terms LBP, PGP, and combination pain.     

Misconceptions of physical therapists and medical doctors regarding the impact of lifting a light load on low back pain

BackgroundA common misconception about low back pain (LBP) is that the spine is weak and that lumbar flexion should be avoided. Because the beliefs of health-care professionals (HCPs) influence patients, it is important to understand the attitudes of health care professionals towards LBP and lifting.ObjectivesTo assess and compare the perceptions of different categories of HCPs regarding the safety of specific movement strategies used to lift a light load, and their beliefs regarding back pain. The secondary aim was to determine whether certain factors influenced the beliefs of HCPs.MethodsData were collected via an electronic survey. Student and qualified physical therapists (PTs), medical students, and general practitioner (GP) trainees were included. The questionnaire included eight photographs, depicting eight different strategies to lift a light load. Respondents were requested to select the strategy(s) they considered as “unsafe” to use for asymptomatic people with a previous history of LBP and people with chronic LBP. Beliefs and attitudes towards LBP were evaluated using the Back Pain Attitudes Questionnaire (Back-PAQ).ResultsQuestionnaires from 1005 participants were included. Seventy percent of qualified PTs considered none of the strategies as harmful (versus 32% of PT students, 9% of GP trainees and 1% of medical students). Qualified PTs had higher Back-PAQ scores (mean ± SD: 13.6 ± 5.5) than PT students (8.7 ± 5.7), GP trainees (5.9 ± 5.9) and medical students (4.1 ± 5.2), indicating less misconceptions regarding LBP. Having LBP negatively influenced beliefs while taking a pain education course positively influenced beliefs.ConclusionMisconceptions regarding LBP and the harmfulness of lifting a light load with a rounded back remain common among HCPs, particularly medical doctors.     

Low back pain prevalence in Sao Paulo,Brazil: A cross-sectional study

BackgroundLow back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide, and the burden of LBP is expected to increase in coming decades, particularly in middle-income countries. There is a lack of large and high-quality studies investigating the prevalence of LBP in Brazil.ObjectiveTo estimate the point, one-year, and lifetime prevalence of non-specific LBP in adults from the city of São Paulo, Brazil.MethodsThis community-based, cross-sectional study recruited 3000 participants in flow point locations randomly selected from census sectors of São Paulo. Interviews and self-administered questionnaires were used to estimate point prevalence, one-year prevalence, and lifetime prevalence of LBP.ResultsThe estimate of point prevalence was 9.8% (95% CI: 8.8, 11.0), one-year prevalence was 48.1% (95% CI: 46.3, 49.9), and lifetime prevalence was 62.6% (95% CI: 60.8, 64.3). One-year and lifetime prevalence were higher in females, obese people, people insufficiently active and sedentary, current smokers, people who are exposed to repetitive movements, crouched or kneeling position, people dissatisfied with their job, people a little bit or very stressed, a little bit or very anxious, and a little bit depressed, and people with good and fair or poor general health. Lifetime prevalence was also higher in people exposed to standing positions and exposure to carrying weight.ConclusionsThe high point, one-year, and lifetime prevalence of LBP in Brazil indicates that there is a need for coordinated efforts from government, the private sector, universities, health workers, and civil society to deliver appropriate management of LBP in middle-income countries.     

Investigating key predictors of persistent low back pain: A focus on psychological stress

AimTo investigate the degree to which psychological stress, self-reported pain scores, and pain sensitivity during an acute state of low back pain (LBP) predict the development of persistent LBP trajectories.BackgroundIdentifying which factors influence LBP trajectories is critical to understand why some individuals experience persistent LBP and to illuminate areas for nursing intervention.MethodsA secondary data analysis of a prospective study examining trajectories of LBP was conducted. The sample was comprised of 217 adults with acute-onset LBP recruited from the community and followed over 24 weeks. Variables of interest included demographic data, perceived stress scores, self-reported pain scores, and somatosensory characteristics collected within the first 4 weeks of LBP onset. The data were analyzed using non-parametric bivariate comparisons and a semi-parametric Cox proportional hazards model with interval-censoring.ResultsIndividuals with higher psychological stress scores were less likely to experience pain resolution (Hazard ratio [HR] = 0.555, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.36–0.85, p = 0.02). After adjustment for covariates in the final model, the analysis revealed household income (HR = 2.79, 95% CI [1.63–4.67], p < 0.001) to be the dominant predictor of LBP persistence in this sample.ConclusionHeightened psychological stress and pain severity as well as decreased pressure pain thresholds were indicated as influential factors of LBP trajectories. Household income was identified as the dominant predictor, demonstrating that individuals with a higher household income were more likely to resolve their pain. Strategies which integrate assessment of stress, self-reported pain scores, pain sensitivity, and social determinants for patients experiencing pain are needed to advance nursing care.     

Do Visual Pain Trajectories Reflect the Actual Course of Low Back Pain? A Longitudinal Cohort Study

Different trajectories of low back pain (LBP) have been identified prospectively using repeated measures. For these trajectories to inform clinical practice, they must be available in the clinical consultation. Therefore, identified LBP trajectories have been translated into visual pain trajectories (VPTs) that allow people with LBP, at the time of consult, to reflect upon their pain experience and identify the VPT that best categorizes their pain course. We have limited knowledge regarding the extent to which a chosen VPT reflects the prospectively experienced trajectory. Thus, we explored the distribution of pain intensity and pain pattern characteristics (from prospective pain trajectory data) within the retrospectively chosen VPT classes. We enrolled patients with LBP from Danish chiropractic practice. Using SMS, participants (n = 719) scored their pain weekly on an 11-point numerical rating scale for 52 weeks. At week 52, participants identified 1 of 8 VPTs that reflected their perceived back pain trajectory during the preceding year. We found that the chosen VPTs reflected pain intensity, but that pain patterns (episodic, fluctuating, and persistent) were not systematically recognized, and the experienced course varied substantially amongst participants within the same VPT. The VPTs are related to some aspects of the experienced LBP course but are not a proxy for the SMS-measured trajectories. Reasons for apparent mismatches between the experienced course of LBP and VPT recall warrant further investigation.PerspectiveSelf-reported back pain trajectories reflected pain intensities obtained through weekly SMS tracking over a year, but participants’ recall did not reflect the pain patterns (episodes and fluctuations) discovered prospectively. Clinicians can use self-reported pain trajectories to facilitate a dialog about pain experience, but not as a proxy for prospective measures.     

Lack of Consensus Across Clinical Guidelines Regarding the Role of Psychosocial Factors Within Low Back Pain Care: A Systematic Review

It is widely accepted that psychosocial prognostic factors should be addressed by clinicians in their assessment and management of patient suffering from low back pain (LBP). On the other hand, an overview is missing how these factors are addressed in clinical LBP guidelines. Therefore, our objective was to summarize and compare recommendations regarding the assessment and management of psychosocial prognostic factors for LBP chronicity, as reported in clinical LBP guidelines. We performed a systematic search of clinical LBP guidelines (PROSPERO registration number 154730). This search consisted of a combination of previously published systematic review articles and a new systematic search in medical or guideline-related databases. From the included guidelines, we extracted recommendations regarding the assessment and management of LBP which addressed psychosocial prognostic factors (ie, psychological factors [“yellow flags”], perceptions about the relationship between work and health, [“blue flags”], system or contextual obstacles [“black flags”) and psychiatric symptoms [“orange flags”]). In addition, we evaluated the level or quality of evidence of these recommendations. In total, we included 15 guidelines. Psychosocial prognostic factors were addressed in 13 of 15 guidelines regarding their assessment and in 14 of 15 guidelines regarding their management. Recommendations addressing psychosocial factors almost exclusively concerned “yellow” or “black flags,” and varied widely across guidelines. The supporting evidence was generally of very low quality. We conclude that in general, clinical LBP guidelines do not provide clinicians with clear instructions about how to incorporate psychosocial factors in LBP care and should be optimized in this respect. More specifically, clinical guidelines vary widely in whether and how they address psychosocial factors, and recommendations regarding these factors generally require better evidence support. This emphasizes a need for a stronger evidence-base underlying the role of psychosocial risk factors within LBP care, and a need for uniformity in methodology and terminology across guidelines.PerspectiveThis systematic review summarized clinical guidelines on low back pain (LBP) on how they addressed the identification and management of psychosocial factors. This review revealed a large amount of variety across guidelines in whether and how psychosocial factors were addressed. Moreover, recommendations generally lacked details and were based on low quality evidence.     

Evidence for Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in the Management of Low Back Pain?

Abstract

Low back pain is a huge burden on society and the health care system, and cost the UK over £1.5 billion in 1998 alone. One of the modalities available to treat this condition is transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), a form of electrotherapy that is inexpensive and widely used by clinicians and patients alike for many conditions including pain relief. The aim of this review was to determine whether TENS is an effective treatment for pain relief in people with low back pain. This paper outlines the evidence for the use of TENS for low back pain, and recommends that future research should try to map specific TENS parameters with each of the different types of low back pain.     

Study protocol for targeted interventions to prevent chronic low back pain in high-risk patients: A multi-site pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial (TARGET Trial)

BackgroundLow back pain (LBP) is one of the most prevalent and potentially disabling conditions for which people seek health care. Patients, providers, and payers agree that greater effort is needed to prevent acute LBP from transitioning to chronic LBP.Methods and study designThe TARGET (Targeted Interventions to Prevent Chronic Low Back Pain in High-Risk Patients) Trial is a primary care-based, multisite, cluster randomized, pragmatic trial comparing guideline-based care (GBC) to GBC + referral to Psychologically Informed Physical Therapy (PIPT) for patients presenting with acute LBP and identified as high risk for persistent disabling symptoms. Study sites include primary care clinics within each of five geographical regions in the United States, with clinics randomized to either GBC or GBC + PIPT. Acute LBP patients at all clinics are risk stratified (high, medium, low) using the STarT Back Tool. The primary outcomes are the presence of chronic LBP and LBP-related functional disability determined by the Oswestry Disability Index at 6 months. Secondary outcomes are LBP-related processes of health care and utilization of services over 12 months, determined through electronic medical records. Study enrollment began in May 2016 and concluded in June 2018. The trial was powered to include at least 1860 high-risk patients in the randomized controlled trial cohort. A prospective observational cohort of approximately 6900 low and medium-risk acute LBP patients was enrolled concurrently.DiscussionThe TARGET pragmatic trial aims to establish the effectiveness of the stratified approach to acute LBP intervention targeting high-risk patients with GBC and PIPT.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02647658 Registered Jan. 6, 2016.     

Physical activity and low back pain: A critical narrative review

BackgroundNon-specific low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide. Physical activity is an integral part of LBP treatment.ObjectiveTo critically review available evidence regarding the efficacy of physical activity for people with LBP.MethodsUp to date critical narrative review of the efficacy of physical activity for the managment LBP. The process of article selection was unsystematic; articles were selected based on authors’ expertise, self-knowledge and reflective practice.ResultsTherapeutic physical activity for LBP includes a wide range of non-specific and specific activities. The efficacy of physical activity on pain and activity limitations has been widely assessed. In acute and subacute LBP, exercise did not reduce pain compared to no exercise. In chronic low back pain (CLBP), exercise reduced pain at the earliest follow-up compared with no exercise. In a recent systematic review, exercise improved function both at the end of treatment and in the long-term compared with usual care. Exercice also reduced work disability in the long-term. We were unable to establish a clear hierarchy between different exercise modalities. Multidisciplinary functional programs consistently improved pain and function in the short- and long-term compared with usual care and physiotherapy and improved the long-term likelihood of returning to work compared to non-multidisciplinary programs.ConclusionPhysical activity of all types is an effective treatment for CLBP.     

Prognostic Indicators of Low Back Pain in Primary Care: Five-Year Prospective Study

Back pain is common and many people experience long-term problems, yet little is known about what prognostic factors predict long-term outcomes. This study's objective was to determine which factors predict short- and long-term outcomes in primary care consulters with low back pain (LBP). Analysis was carried out on 488 patients who had consulted their physician about LBP. Patients were followed up at 6 months and 5 years. Clinically significant LBP at follow-up was defined as a score of 2, 3, or 4 on the Chronic Pain Grade, indicating substantial pain and disability. Cox regression was used to estimate relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) on 32 potential predictive factors, organized into domains (demographic, physical, psychological, and occupational). Baseline pain intensity conferred a 12% increase in risk (RR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.03–1.20), and patients' belief that their LBP would persist conferred a 4% increase in risk (RR = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.01–1.07) for poor outcome at 6 months. Outcome at 5 years was best predicted by a model with the same factors as in the 6-month model: pain intensity increased risk by 9% (RR = 1.09, 95% CI = .997–1.20), and a belief that their LBP would persist increased risk by 6% (RR = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.03–1.09). Both predictors have the potential to be targets for clinical intervention.PerspectiveFew studies have investigated factors that predict long-term back pain. This study has shown that pain intensity experienced during a period of primary care consultation, and patients' perception about whether their back pain will persist, were significant predictors of poor outcome at 6 months and at 5 years.     

The selfBACK artificial intelligence-based smartphone app can improve low back pain outcome even in patients with high levels of depression or stress

Background

selfBACK provides individually tailored self-management support for low back pain (LBP) via an artificial intelligence-based smartphone app. We explore whether those with depressive/stress symptoms can benefit from this technology.

Methods

Secondary analysis of the selfBACK randomized controlled trial (n = 461). Participants with LBP were randomized to usual care (n = 229), or usual care plus selfBACK (n = 232). Primary outcome: LBP-related disability (Roland–Morris Disability Questionnaire, RMDQ) over 9 months. Secondary outcomes: global perceived effect (GPE)/pain self-efficacy (PSEQ)/satisfaction/app engagement. Baseline depressive symptoms were measured using the patient health questionnaire (PHQ-8) and stress with the perceived stress scale (PSS). Outcomes stratified by baseline PHQ-8/PSS scores to assess associations across the whole cohort, and intervention versus control groups.

Results

Participants with higher levels of depressive/stress symptoms reported more baseline LBP-related disability (RMDQ 3.1; 1.6 points higher in most vs least depressed/stressed groups respectively); lower self-efficacy (PSEQ 8.1; 4.6 points lower in most vs least depressive/stressed groups respectively). LBP-related disability improved over time; relative risk of improvement in those with greatest depressive/stress symptoms versus nil symptom comparators at 9 months: 0.8 (95% CI: 0.6 to 1.0) and 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7 to 1.0) respectively. No evidence that different baseline levels of depressive/perceived stress symptoms are associated with different RMDQ/GPE/PSEQ outcomes. Whilst participants with higher PHQ-8/PSS were less likely to be satisfied or engage with the app, there was no consistent association among PHQ-8/PSS level, the intervention and outcomes.

Conclusions

The selfBACK app can improve outcomes even in those with high levels of depressive/stress symptoms and could be recommended for patients with LBP.

Significance

We have demonstrated that an app supporting the self-management of LBP is helpful, even in those with higher levels of baseline depression and stress symptoms. selfBACK offers an opportunity to support people with LBP and provides clinicians with an additional tool for their patients, even those with depression or high levels of stress. This highlights the potential for digital health interventions for chronic pain.     

The perceptions of people with low back pain treated in the Spanish National Health,and their experience while undergoing a new evidence-based treatment. A focus group study

Abstract

Purpose: To explore the perceptions of people with low back pain (LBP) treated within the Spanish National Health Service, and their experience while undergoing a new evidence-based treatment (“neuroreflexotherapy”). Methods: A focus group (FG) study was conducted. Participants were divided into five groups according to whether they: suffered from subacute versus chronic LBP; had undergone one versus several neuroreflexotherapy procedures; showed a clinically relevant improvement in pain and disability according to validated measuring instruments, and reported it. Thirty-two patients were selected by purposive sampling. Content analysis was undertaken by two researchers who had no contact with the clinicians. Results: Subacute and chronic LBP curtails daily activities, reduces quality of life (QoL) and self-esteem, and is experienced as a stigma. Patients want to be treated with respect and empathy by clinicians who refrain from judging them. New treatments trigger hope, but also fear and mistrust. Most patients experiencing a clinically relevant improvement resume daily activities, and report improvement in QoL, self-esteem and emotional wellbeing. Conclusion: Southern European LBP patients have similar perceptions to those in other cultural settings. LBP jeopardizes patients’ QoL and self-esteem. When pain improves significantly, patients are happy to acknowledge it and resume their normal life.

• Implications for Rehabilitation

• People with low back pain (LBP) want to be treated with respect and empathy by clinicians who inspire confidence and refrain from judging them.

• When faced with a new evidence based treatment, people with subacute and chronic LBP are hopeful, but apprehensive.

• Most of those who experience a clinically meaningful improvement after treatment are happy to acknowledge it and resume an active and fulfilling life.

• People who report no improvements after being treated, should be believed.

     

Information needs of people with low back pain for an online resource: a qualitative study of consumer views

Abstract

Purpose: To identify the information needs of people with low back pain (LBP) in Australia, and the preferred methods to present this information online, as a basis for development of a patient-centred website. Available online LBP resources are limited in quality and content and it is not clear if they are meeting the needs of sufferers. Method: Focus groups and semi-structured telephone interviews, involving 28 people with LBP. Results: Seven categories of information were identified: reasons for LBP, treatment and management options, self-help information, psychological and social dimensions, lay stories, quality assurance of information and roles of different healthcare professionals and locally available services. Identified preferences for online presentation included: multimodality, emphasis on visual media, readability and interactivity. Participants had been unable to obtain desired LBP information using existing resources. Conclusions: This study provides important guidance for development of a patient-centred website grounded in the expressed needs and preferences of people with LBP. Understanding the breadth of patients’ questions and concerns is essential for provision of patient-centred information and interventions. Incorporating these with the current evidence base would provide an accessible and relevant LBP patient education referral point, which is currently lacking.

• Implications for Rehabilitation

• Use of the internet to obtain health information is increasing, although there is little evidence that existing low back pain websites are meeting the expressed needs of health consumers.

• Our research suggests that people with low back pain have difficulty finding relevant and trustworthy information about the condition on the internet.

• Taking patient information needs and presentation preferences into account when designing online information material will provide people with low back pain an accessible and relevant educational resource that is currently lacking.