| 1. |
- Costa, Nathalia, et al.
(författare)
-
A Definition of "Flare" in Low Back Pain: A Multiphase Process Involving Perspectives of Individuals With Low Back Pain and Expert Consensus
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of Pain. - : CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE. - 1526-5900 .- 1528-8447. ; 20:11, s. 1267-1275
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Low back pain (LBP) varies over time. Consumers, clinicians, and researchers use various terms to describe LBP fluctuations, such as episodes, recurrences and flares. Although "flare" is use commonly, there is no consensus on how it is defined. This study aimed to obtain consensus for a LBP flare definition using a mixed-method approach. Step 1 involved the derivation of a preliminary candidate flare definition based on thematic analysis of views of 130 consumers in consultation with an expert consumer writer. In step 2, a workshop was conducted to incorporate perspectives of 19 LBP experts into the preliminary flare definition, which resulted in 2 alternative LBP flare definitions. Step 3 refined the definition using a 2-round Delphi consensus with 50 experts in musculoskeletal conditions. The definition favored by experts was further tested with 16 individuals with LBP in step 4, using the definition in three scenarios. This multiphase study produced a definition of LBP flare that distinguishes it from other LBP fluctuations, represents consumers views, involves expert consensus, and is understandable by consumers in clinical and research contexts: "A flare-up is a worsening of your condition that lasts from hours to weeks that is difficult to tolerate and generally impacts your usual activities and/or emotions." Perspective: A multiphase process, incorporating consumers views and expert consensus, produced a definition of LBP flare that distinguishes it from other LBP fluctuations. (C) 2019 by the American Pain Society
|
|
| 2. |
- Abbott, Allan, 1978-, et al.
(författare)
-
Effectiveness of implementing a best practice primary healthcare model for low back pain (BetterBack) compared with current routine care in the Swedish context : an internal pilot study informed protocol for an effectiveness-implementation hybrid type 2 trial
- 2018
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 2044-6055. ; 8:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction Low back pain (LBP) is a major health problem commonly requiring healthcare. In Sweden, there is a call from healthcare practitioners (HCPs) for the development, implementation and evaluation of a best practice primary healthcare model for LBP.Aims (1) To improve and understand the mechanisms underlying changes in HCP confidence, attitudes and beliefs for providing best practice coherent primary healthcare for patients with LBP; (2) to improve and understand the mechanisms underlying illness beliefs, self-care enablement, pain, disability and quality of life in patients with LBP; and (3) to evaluate a multifaceted and sustained implementation strategy and the cost-effectiveness of the BetterBack☺ model of care (MOC) for LBP from the perspective of the Swedish primary healthcare context.Methods This study is an effectiveness-implementation hybrid type 2 trial testing the hypothesised superiority of the BetterBack☺ MOC compared with current routine care. The trial involves simultaneous testing of MOC effects at the HCP, patient and implementation process levels. This involves a prospective cohort study investigating implementation at the HCP level and a patient-blinded, pragmatic, cluster, randomised controlled trial with longitudinal follow-up at 3, 6 and 12 months post baseline for effectiveness at the patient level. A parallel process and economic analysis from a healthcare sector perspective will also be performed. Patients will be allocated to routine care (control group) or the BetterBack☺ MOC (intervention group) according to a stepped cluster dogleg structure with two assessments in routine care. Experimental conditions will be compared and causal mediation analysis investigated. Qualitative HCP and patient experiences of the BetterBack☺ MOC will also be investigated.Dissemination The findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences. Further national dissemination and implementation in Sweden and associated national quality register data collection are potential future developments of the project.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Buck, Sebastian, et al.
(författare)
-
Risk assessment of physical exposure among healthcare workers when performing patient handling - Translation and cross-cultural validation of the TilThermometer for a Swedish version
- 2022
-
Ingår i: SH@W Safety and Health at Work. - : Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute. - 2093-7911 .- 2093-7997. ; 13:Suppl., s. S215-S215
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Introduction: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are common in the healthcare sector due to physical demanding work tasks. Risk assessment is one cornerstone for preventing of injuries and promoting a safety culture. The TilThermometer has proved to be useful in the Netherlands for assessing healthcare workers’ physical exposure and is part of the CEN ISO TR 12296-2013 Ergonomics – Manual Handling of People in the Healthcare sector. The aim of this study was to translate the risk assessment instrument TilThermometer from Dutch to Swedish, evaluate its linguistic validity and perform a cross-cultural adaptation for a Swedish healthcare context.Material and Methods: The translation and cross-cultural adaptation followed a structured process containing eight steps: 1) Translation, 2) Synthesis, 3) Back-translation, 4) Synthesis, 5) Linguistic review, 6) Expert panel review according to Delphi-method and 8) Semi-structured interviews, using qualitative content analysis.Results: This process resulted in a Swedish version of the risk assessment instrument TilThermometer and assured linguistic validity and cross-cultural adaptation to a Swedish context. Consensus was reached in the expert review after two Delphi rounds. Interviews emerged into: 1) “User-friendly and understandable instrument”, 2) “Further development”, and 3) “Important part of the systematic work-environment management”.Conclusion: The Swedish TilThermometer is now ready to be tested in the Swedish healthcare sector. Next phase is to continue further testing the psychometrics aspects, inter-rater reliability and feasibility of TilThermometer.
|
|
| 5. |
- Buck, Sebastian, et al.
(författare)
-
Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the risk assessment instrument TilThermometer for a Swedish version : patient handling in the healthcare sector
- 2022
-
Ingår i: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. - London, United Kingdom : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1471-2474. ; 23:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are common in the healthcare sector due to exposure of physical demanding work tasks. Risk assessment is necessary to prevent injuries and promote a safety culture. The TilThermometer has proved to be useful in the Netherlands for assessing healthcare workers' physical exposure to patient handling. The aim of this study was to translate the risk assessment instrument TilThermometer from Dutch to Swedish, perform cross-cultural adaptation, and evaluate its linguistic validity to a Swedish healthcare context.METHODS: Translation and validation process was performed according to following eight steps: 1) Translation (two translators), 2) Synthesis, 3) Back-translation (two back-translators), 4) Synthesis, 5) Linguistic review (one bilingual reviewer), 6) fifteen experts in a panel review according to Delphi-method, 7) Semi-structured interviewing eleven informants, analyzed using qualitative content analysis and step 8) discussion and input from creators of the instrument.RESULTS: A new Swedish version, the TilThermometer, was provided through the translation process (steps 1-5). The linguistic validity and usefulness were confirmed thru step 6 and 7. Consensus was reached in the expert review after two rounds, comments were analyzed and grouped into five groups. The qualitative content analyses of the interviews emerged in to three categories: 1) "User-friendly and understandable instrument", 2) "Further development", and 3) "Important part of the systematic work-environment management".CONCLUSION: In this study, the cross-cultural adaption and translation performed of the Swedish version of TilThermometer assured linguistic validity. This is this first phase before further testing the psychometrics aspects, inter-rater reliability and feasibility of TilThermometer. In the second phase TilThermometer will be implemented and evaluated together with other measures in the Swedish healthcare sector.
|
|
| 6. |
- Eklund, Katarina, et al.
(författare)
-
A cost-utility analysis of multimodal pain rehabilitation in primary healthcare
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Scandinavian Journal of Pain. - : De Gruyter Open. - 1877-8860 .- 1877-8879. ; 1, s. 48-58
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: Multimodal rehabilitation programs (MMRPs) have been shown to be both cost-effective and an effective method for managing chronic pain in specialist care. However, while the vast majority of patients are treated in primary healthcare, MMRPs are rarely practiced in these settings. Limited time and resources for everyday activities alongside the complexity of chronic pain makes the management of chronic pain challenging in primary healthcare and the focus is on unimodal treatment. In order to increase the use of MMRPs incentives such as cost savings and improved health status in the patient group are needed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MMRPs for patients with chronic pain in primary healthcare in two Swedish regions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MMRPs at one-year follow-up in comparison with care as usual for patients with chronic pain in primary healthcare in two Swedish regions.Methods: A cost-utility analysis was performed alongside a prospective cohort study comparing the MMRP with the alternative of continuing with care as usual. The health-related quality of life (HRQoL), using EQ5D, and working situation of 234 participants were assessed at baseline and one-year follow-up. The primary outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained while the secondary outcome was sickness absence. An extrapolation of costs was performed based on previous long-term studies in order to evaluate the effects of the MMRP over a five-year time period.Results: The mean (SD) EQ5D index, which measures HRQoL, increased significantly (p<0.001) from 0.34 (0.32) to 0.44 (0.32) at one-year follow-up. Sickness absence decreased by 15%. The cost-utility analysis showed a cost per QALY gained of 18 704 € at one-year follow-up.Conclusions: The results indicate that the MMRP significantly improves the HRQoL of the participants and is a cost-effective treatment for patients with chronic pain in primary healthcare when a newly suggested cost-effectiveness threshold of 19 734 € is implemented. The extrapolation indicates that considerable cost savings in terms of reduced loss of production and gained QALYs may be generated if the effects of the MMRP are maintained beyond one-year follow-up. The study demonstrates potential benefits of MMRPs in primary healthcare for both the patient with chronic pain and the society as a whole. The cost-effectiveness of MMRPs in primary healthcare has scarcely been studied and further long-term studies are needed in these settings.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Enthoven, Paul, 1955-
(författare)
-
Back pain : long-term course and predictive factors
- 2005
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background. Better knowledge of the long-term course in patients treated in primary care for back pain (clinical course) and in patients that do not receive specific treatment after seeking care (clinical natural course) is needed to enable health professionals and their patients to understand the likely course of back pain and to make clinical decisions about treatment alternatives.Aims. To increase and deepen the knowledge of the course of back pain during 2½ and 5 years, and of predictive factors for health condition and sick-leave at 1-year and 5-year follow-ups for patients with low back pain. In addition specific emphasis was on assessing the influence of type of outcome measure, timepoint of assessment of the outcome measure, timepoint of assessment of the predictive factors (baseline, after treatment or after four weeks) and inclusion of different combinations of predictive factors. Furthermore to assess the ability of physiotherapists to predict which patients will return for additional care if they do not receive specific treatment.Material and Methods. The thesis is based on two cohorts of patients between 18 to 60 years of age seeking primary care for back pain. Exclusion criteria were having received active treatment for the current back pain within the previous month, other disease, recent accident, pregnancy, and inability to understand Swedish. In one cohort 254 patients previously treated in primary care filled out a 5-year follow-up questionnaire. Also in the other cohort almost the same questionnaire was used, including a package of well-known measures of pain, disability, recurrence rate, healthcare consumption, sick-leave, and questions regarding demographic data. The other cohort including 56 patients was used to describe the clinical natural course with 2½-year follow-up. Patients filled out questionnaires at baseline, after 4 weeks, at 6 months and at 1- and 2½ year follow-ups. Besides physical measures were assessed at baseline and after four weeks. The physiotherapist predicted whether the patient would or would not return for additional care. Main outcome measures for describing the course of back pain were pain and disability, and secondary measures were recurrence rate and health care consumption. Logistic regression was used to identify predictive factors for disability and sick-leave. Prediction models for the two outcome variables at the I-year and 5-year follow-up were created to assess whether the models were influenced by difference in outcome measure, timepoint of measuring the outcome, timepoint of assessment of potential predictive factors (baseline or after treatment), and different combinations of potential predictive factors included in the models. Potential predictive factors included were "standard" factors age, gender, sick-leave, pain frequency, disability, well-being, expectations of treatment, similar problems the previous 5 years, duration of the current episode, more than one localization, and physical activity-related and work-related independent variables. Linear regression was used to assess the predictive value of physical measures, assessed at baseline and at 4-week follow-up, for health condition at 1-year follow-up.Results. About half the patients treated in primary care reported pain and disability at the land 5-year follow-up. Around two third of the patients reported recurrence or continuous pain, and approximately one third of the patients reported additional healthcare consumption during the previous 6 months at the 1-year and 5-year follow-up. These proportions were similar for the clinical natural course cohort at the 1-year and 2½-year follow-up. Predictive factors for disability and sick-leave were only partly the same. Disability appeared to be an important predictive factor for future disability. Sick-leave and dissatisfaction with the workplace appeared to be important predictive factors for future sick-leave. Predictive factors for outcome at 1-year and 5-year follow-up were only partly the same. Health state related variables and duration of the current episode seemed to be stronger predictive factors for outcome at 1-year follow-up than for outcome at 5-year follow-up, whereas being a woman, and physical activity-related and work-related factors were stronger predictive factors for outcome at 5-year follow-up. Health state related variables assessed after treatment appeared to be stronger predictive factors for future disability or sick-leave compared with corresponding variables at baseline. Several confidence intervals were wide and the results must be interpreted with caution. Three out of four physical measures assessed at 4-week follow-up seemed to be predictive factors for health condition after one year. None of these four measures assessed at baseline had predictive value. The physiotherapists showed ability to predict which patients would or would not return for additional care.Conclusions. A substantial proportion of patients seeking primary care for back pain continued to report back pain several years after seeking care. Future research should focus on prevention, as well as on management of patients with long-term back pain. Both selfreported measures related to health state, physical activity and work, as well as physical measures and prediction by health professionals seem helpful to identify patients at risk of worse future health condition and sick-leave. Further exploration of the predictive value of disability and sick-leave showed that future disability was predicted by disability only, and future sick-leave was predicted by both sick-leave and disability. In clinical practice, selfreported measures and physical measures can be assessed for various reasons. To improve the ability to predict future outcome, information obtained at a later timepoint than baseline should be used instead of information obtained at the first visit. Assessment of physical measures at baseline was useless for prediction purposes. Future studies should include other factors, such as psychosocial predictive factors found in other studies, to further improve the ability to predict future health condition and sick-leave. Another promising area of research is further exploration of the ability of health care professionals to predict outcomes, and on what grounds they base their predictions.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
