"Keep it simple": Perspectives of patients with low back pain on how to qualify a patient-centred consultation using patient-reported outcomes

Health-related quality of life, needs, and concerns among cancer survivors referred to rehabilitation in primary healthcare setting

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There is a growing need for rehabilitation services beyond hospitals. This study aims to describe challenges faced by cancer survivors (CSs) referred for rehabilitation in primary healthcare, employing standardized scales measuring health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and open-ended questions. Furthermore, the study explores the applicability of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in comprehensively understanding challenges encountered by CSs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study involves CSs referred for cancer rehabilitation in a primary healthcare setting, including those participating in PROs as a part of routine practice. HRQOL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G). The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framed the analysis of responses to open-ended questions 'what concerns you the most?' and 'what matters to you?'  Results: FACT-G showed the lowest scores for functional well-being (14.4) and emotional well-being (16.6), with higher scores for physical well-being (18.9) and social/family well-being (21.1). Responses to open-ended questions unveiled worries about everyday life and how cancer will impact family well-being presently and in the future. Furthermore, CSs reported a need to maintain normality and proactively address the challenges posed by the disease.

INTERPRETATION

CSs referred for rehabilitation in primary healthcare experience comprehensive challenges necessitating a holistic rehabilitation approach. This includes interventions supporting CSs in dealing with uncertainty, regaining a sense of control, and addressing family well-being concerns. When using PROs for need assessment, the combination of validated HRQOL scales and open-ended questions is crucial for an in-depth understanding of CSs' challenges.

Acceptance and use of a clinical decision support system in musculoskeletal pain disorders - the SupportPrim project

BACKGROUND

We have developed a clinical decision support system (CDSS) based on methods from artificial intelligence to support physiotherapists and patients in the decision-making process of managing musculoskeletal (MSK) pain disorders in primary care. The CDSS finds the most similar successful patients from the past to give treatment recommendations for a new patient. Using previous similar patients with successful outcomes to advise treatment moves management of MSK pain patients from one-size fits all recommendations to more individually tailored treatment. This study aimed to summarise the development and explore the acceptance and use of the CDSS for MSK pain patients.

METHODS

This qualitative study was carried out in the Norwegian physiotherapy primary healthcare sector between October and November 2020, ahead of a randomised controlled trial. We included four physiotherapists and three of their patients, in total 12 patients, with musculoskeletal pain in the neck, shoulder, back, hip, knee or complex pain. We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with all participants. The interviews were analysed using the Framework Method.

RESULTS

Overall, both the physiotherapists and patients found the system acceptable and usable. Important findings from the analysis of the interviews were that the CDSS was valued as a preparatory and exploratory tool, facilitating the therapeutic relationship. However, the physiotherapists used the system mainly to support their previous and current practice rather than involving patients to a greater extent in decisions and learning from previous successful patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The CDSS was acceptable and usable to both the patients and physiotherapists. However, the system appeared not to considerably influence the physiotherapists' clinical reasoning and choice of treatment based on information from most similar successful patients. This could be due to a smaller than optimal number of previous patients in the CDSS or insufficient clinical implementation. Extensive training of physiotherapists should not be underestimated to build understanding and trust in CDSSs.

The biopsychosocial model is lost in translation: from misrepresentation to an enactive modernization

INTRODUCTION

There are increasing recommendations to use the biopsychosocial model (BPSM) as a guide for musculoskeletal research and practice. However, there is a wide range of interpretations and applications of the model, many of which deviate from George Engel's original BPSM. These deviations have led to confusion and suboptimal patient care.

OBJECTIVES

1) To review Engel's original work; 2) outline prominent BPSM interpretations and misapplications in research and practice; and 3) present an "enactive" modernization of the BPSM.

METHODS

Critical narrative review in the context of musculoskeletal pain.

RESULTS

The BPSM has been biomedicalized, fragmented, and used in reductionist ways. Two useful versions of the BPSM have been running mostly in parallel, rarely converging. The first version is a "humanistic" interpretation based on person- and relationship-centredness. The second version is a "causation" interpretation focused on multifactorial contributors to illness and health. Recently, authors have argued that a modern enactive approach to the BPSM can accommodate both interpretations.

CONCLUSION

The BPSM is often conceptualized in narrow ways and only partially implemented in clinical care. We outline how an "enactive-BPS approach" to musculoskeletal care aligns with Engel's vision yet addresses theoretical limitations and may mitigate misapplications.

Chiropractic Management of a 67-Year-Old Veteran With Chronic Low Back Pain Utilizing Low-Velocity Flexion-Distraction: A Case Report

Objective

The purpose of this case report was to describe the treatment of an older veteran with chronic low back pain, utilizing flexion-distraction as a primary intervention for management.

Clinical Features

A 67-year-old man with chronic low back pain for several decades presented to the chiropractic clinic for evaluation. He reported low back pain that extended into the right lower extremity intermittently. The patient's imaging demonstrated significant degenerative changes in the lumber spinal anatomy. He had never experienced chiropractic interventions or management for his condition.

Intervention and Outcome

A trial of conservative care with flexion-distraction was applied as a primary intervention for the management of chronic low back pain. Instrument-assisted soft-tissue mobilization and moist heat were also applied for interventions. Despite having no changes in outcome assessments, the patient reported an improvement in his condition, reduced use of pain medication, and increased mobility after 4 sessions over a 4-week period.

Conclusion

Flexion-distraction was a beneficial chiropractic approach to the management of an older veteran with chronic low back pain and intermittent lower extremity pain for several decades.

What are the views of musculoskeletal physiotherapists and patients on person-centred practice? A systematic review of qualitative studies

PURPOSE

There is a growing expectation of physiotherapists to adopt a person-centred approach to their practice. Person-centredness for musculoskeletal physiotherapy, however, remains an under-researched area. A synthesis of the findings from qualitative studies exploring perceptions of person-centredness in musculoskeletal physiotherapy was conducted to inform future clinical practice.

METHODS

ENTREQ and PRISMA guidelines were used to develop a protocol for a qualitative systematic review registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020170762). Five electronic databases were searched to identify relevant primary studies. Studies were assessed for quality and data extracted. Data were analysed using thematic synthesis.

RESULTS

A total of 3250 studies were identified and screened. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Four main themes emerged from the data: treating each patient as a unique person, the importance of communication for achieving a therapeutic alliance, necessary physiotherapist traits for person-centredness, and supporting patient empowerment.

CONCLUSION

Empowerment of patients in musculoskeletal physiotherapy contexts might be improved through a more narrative approach to assessment, with clinical bravery recognised as a specific person-centred physiotherapy trait able to facilitate this. Physiotherapists should also consider the meaningfulness of any treatment activities they provide to maximise the person-centredness of their approach.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONEmpowerment of patients in musculoskeletal physiotherapy contexts might be improved through a more narrative approach to assessment.Clinical bravery is a person-centred physiotherapy trait that facilitates certain conversational freedom to elicit the true patient narrative.Person-centred physiotherapists should reflect on how meaningful their treatment activities are for individual MSK outpatients.

What is Pain-Related Suffering? Conceptual Critiques, Key Attributes, and Outstanding Questions

Suffering holds a central place within pain research, theory, and practice. However, the construct of pain-related suffering has yet to be operationalized by the International Association for the Study of Pain and is largely underdeveloped. Eric Cassell's seminal work on suffering serves as a conceptual anchor for the limited pain research that specifically addresses this construct. Yet, important critiques of Cassell's work have not been integrated within the pain literature. This Focus Article aims to take a preliminary step towards an updated operationalization of pain-related suffering by 1) presenting key attributes of pain-related suffering derived from a synthesis of the literature and 2) highlighting key challenges associated with Cassell's conceptualization of suffering. We present 4 key attributes: 1) pain and suffering are inter-related, but distinct experiences, 2) suffering is a subjective experience, 3) the experience of suffering is characterized by a negative affective valence, and 4) disruption to one's sense of self is an integral part of suffering. A key outstanding challenge is that suffering is commonly viewed as a self-reflective and future-oriented process, which fails to validate many forms of suffering and marginalizes certain populations. Future research addressing different modes of suffering - with and without self-reflection - are discussed. PERSPECTIVE: This article offers a preliminary step toward operationalizing the construct of pain-related suffering and proposes priorities for future research. A robust operationalization of this construct is essential to developing clinical strategies that aim to better recognize and alleviate suffering among people living with pain.

ICF-Based Assessment of Functioning in Daily Clinical Practice. A Promising Direction Toward Patient-Centred Care in Patients With Low Back Pain

Background: Patient-centred care has received increased attention in recent years. Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and shared decision-making are key components of Patient-Centred care. Low back pain (LBP) is a complex symptom affected by multiple, interacting factors. Therefore, evidence strongly recommend a biopsychosocial and patient-centred approach in the assessment and management. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) provide a biopsychosocial model for describing functioning and disability. ICF is widely acknowledged, but implementation into clinical practice is lacking. To support the use of a biopsychosocial and patient-centred approach in daily clinical practice among patients with LBP we developed a practice-friendly tool based on ICF; the LBP assessment tool.

Objective: To compare an ICF-based assessment facilitated by the LBP assessment tool with standard care in terms of the use of PROs and shared decision-making in order to promote patient-centred care in patients with LBP.

Methods: A non-randomized controlled design was used. Eligible patients were allocated to one of two groups: the ICF group, assessed with the LBP assessment tool or the control group, assessed with a conventional LBP assessment. Primary outcome includes use of PROs. Secondary outcomes include use of a graphical overview displaying the patient profile and shared decision-making. A patient evaluation questionnaire was used to collect data.

Results: Seven hundred ten patients were assessed for eligibility of whom 531 were allocated to the ICF group (n = 299) or the control group (n = 232). A significantly higher use of PRO data (p < 0.00) and the patient profile (p < 0.00) was reported in favor of the ICF group. Patients in the ICF group also experienced being more involved in decision-making (p = 0.01).

Conclusions: This study showed that a functioning assessment, by means of the LBP assessment tool, increased use of PROs and shared decision-making when compared to a conventional LBP assessment. Additionally, this study demonstrated that routine use of ICF-based PRO data and shared decision-making promoted patient-centred care in patients with LBP. The LBP assessment tool may be a strong candidate for a user-friendly ICF-based tool with the potential to support health professionals in a shift toward a biopsychosocial and patient-centred approach to patients with LBP.

Being more than "just a bog-standard knee": the role of person-centred practice in physiotherapy: a narrative inquiry

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to understand how physiotherapeutic encounters were experienced over time by one service user and the extent to which the encounters were person-centred.

METHODS

This narrative inquiry study had one participant purposively sampled due to their extensive experience of physiotherapy in healthcare systems in the United Kingdom. Data were collected through interviews and analysed using Clandinin and Connelly's three-dimensional framework.

RESULTS

Time-related aspects of physiotherapeutic encounters were noted in the evolutionary journey of physiotherapy practice. Personal and social aspects were evident in the words and attitude of the physiotherapists. The influence of place was noted in the role that external forces and the environment played in shaping how physiotherapy was experienced.

CONCLUSIONS

These narratives remind physiotherapists and healthcare providers to reflect on the role they play in shaping the experience of service users and whether those experiences are considered to be person, therapist, or institution centred. Those training pre-registration physiotherapy students need to consider giving students the opportunity to develop and reflect on their philosophy of practice early in the curriculum to enhance the experience of service users in the long-term.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONIt is important for therapists to consider preconceived ideas of what a service user may want, and to listen to them as unique people, with a future journey ahead of them to understand what is truly important to them.Physiotherapists need to reflect on the role they play and the words they use in shaping the experience of care for service users, and whether this is perceived as being person or therapist centred.Physiotherapists who are more person-centred in practice were better placed to promote self-management of long-term conditions.Providing pre-registration physiotherapists with the opportunity to develop their own value-based philosophy of practice during training may enhance the experiences of their service users in the future.

Assessment of functioning and disability in patients with low back pain - the low back pain assessment tool. Part 1: development

PURPOSE

To present the process used to develop the low back pain (LBP) assessment tool including evaluation of the initial content validity of the tool.

METHODS

The development process comprised the elements: definition of construct and content, literature search, item generation, needs assessment, piloting, adaptations, design, and technical production. The LBP assessment tool was developed to assess the construct "functioning and disability" as defined by the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Involvement of patients and health professionals was essential.

RESULTS

The elements were collapsed into five steps. In total, 18 patients and 12 health professionals contributed to the content and the design of the tool. The LBP assessment tool covered all ICF components shared among 63 ICF categories.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents the process used to develop the LBP assessment tool, which is the first tool to address all ICF components and integrate biopsychosocial perspectives provided by patients and health professionals in the same tool. Initial evaluation of content validity showed adequate reflection of the construct "functioning and disability". Further work on the way will evaluate comprehensiveness, acceptability, and degree of implementation of the LBP assessment tool to strengthen its use for clinical practice.Implications for RehabilitationA biopsychosocial and patients-centred approach is a strong foundation for identifying the many relevant aspects related to low back pain (LBP).Responding to a lack of tools to support a biopsychosocial and patients-centred approach the LBP assessment tool was developed using a robust, multi-step process with involvement of patients and health professionals.The LBP assessment tool is a strong candidate for a user-friendly tool to facilitate use of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health in routine clinical practice.

Assessment of functioning and disability in patients with low back pain - the low back pain assessment tool. Part 2: field-testing

PURPOSE

To evaluate comprehensiveness and acceptability of the patient-reported outcome instrument (PRO-LBP) and the clinician-reported outcome instrument (ClinRO-LBP) included in the low back pain (LBP) assessment tool. Second, to assess degree of implementation after three months.

METHODS

Feasibility-testing, training of health professionals, field-testing, and a feedback meeting was undertaken. Field-testing provided data to evaluate comprehensiveness, acceptability, and degree of implementation.

RESULTS

Feasibility-testing and training of health professionals revealed that the LBP assessment tool was usable and ready for field-testing. In total, 152 patients participated in the field-testing of whom 95% considered the PRO-LBP comprehensive and 59% found it acceptable. Health professionals found the ClinRO-LBP comprehensive and acceptable. The feedback meeting revealed that the LBP assessment tool broadened the health professionals' approach to functioning and facilitated a consultation based on the patient perspective. The degree of implementation reached 79%.

CONCLUSIONS

The PRO-LBP and the ClinRO-LBP covered key concepts of LBP and were found acceptable by patients and health professionals. Despite the reduced degree of implementation after three months the LBP assessment tool allowed the health professionals to apply a biopsychosocial and patient-centred approach. Future research should investigate whether the LBP assessment can enhance patient-centred care.Implications for rehabilitationThe low back pain (LBP) assessment tool is the first evidence-based tangible tool to cover biopsychosocial aspects related to LBP as defined by the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).The LBP assessment tool allowed health professionals to apply a biopsychosocial and patients-centred approach and has the potential to be used in rehabilitation planning.Awareness to continuous facilitation and training of health professionals is important to facilitate and maintain implementation of new procedures into routine clinical practice.