Comparing physical therapy students' attitudes and beliefs regarding chronic low back pain and knee osteoarthritis: an international multi-institutional comparison between 2013 and 2020 academic years.

BACKGROUND: In 2013, physical therapy students demonstrated low guideline-adherent recommendations regarding chronic low back pain (CLBP) for spinal pathology, activity, and work. OBJECTIVES: To assess the differences in physical therapy students' attitudes, beliefs, and adherence to guideline recommendations regarding CLBP and knee osteoarthritis between 2013 and 2020. METHODS: In 2013 and 2020, second and fourth-year physical therapy students were recruited from 6 Belgian and 2 Dutch institutions. Attitudes and beliefs regarding CLBP and knee OA were evaluated using the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS-PT), the Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS), and a questionnaire regarding therapeutic exercise and knee osteoarthritis. A clinical vignette was used to measure guideline-adherent recommendations regarding spinal pathology, activity, and work. RESULTS: In 2013, 927 second-year and 695 fourth-year students; in 2020, 695 second-year and 489 fourth-year students; were recruited to participate in the study. Compared to 2013, students had less biomedical and stronger biopsychosocial attitudes and beliefs regarding CLBP, more guideline-adherent recommendations for activity, and more biopsychosocial beliefs regarding the benefits of exercise for patients with knee osteoarthritis in both the second and fourth year. Only fourth-year students in 2020 scored significantly better on HC-PAIRS and guideline-adherent recommendation relating to spinal pathology. No differences were found regarding work recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2013 and 2020, physical therapy students made a positive shift towards a more biopsychosocial approach to CLBP and knee osteoarthritis management. Guideline-adherent recommendations for CLBP concerning activity improved, however, concerning work and spinal pathology, it remained low.

Acceptability, usability and feasibility of experienced sampling method in chronic secondary pain syndromes.

Background: In chronic pain syndromes, symptoms can fluctuate and change over time. Standard questionnaires cannot register these fluctuations. Nonetheless, the experience sampling method (ESM) is developed to collect momentary measurements of everyday complaints, tracing fluctuations in symptoms and disabling factors over time. Although valuable information can be collected in this way, assessment may also be a burden. This study aimed to investigate the acceptability, usability, and feasibility of ESM in chronic secondary pain syndromes, in a single-center study in the Netherlands. Methods: A prospective observational study with repeated measurements was conducted in patients with chronic secondary neuropathic and musculoskeletal pain syndromes, including small fiber neuropathy, spinal cord injury, and rheumatoid disorder. Results: Thirty-four participants were included and filled in the ESM, of whom 19 were diagnosed with small fiber neuropathy, 11 with spinal cord injury, and 4 with a rheumatoid disorder. The mean age was 54.7 ± 13.9 years (range: 23-77) of whom 52.9% were female. In total, 19 participants filled in the general and user-friendliness evaluation about the acceptability and usability of the ESM. The general evaluation showed no influence of ESM on participants' social contacts (mean 1.47, SD 1.12), activities (mean 1.74, SD 1.44), and mood (mean 1.89, SD 1.59). The answers options of ESM were a good representation of the experiences of participants (mean 4.58, SD 1.77). Regarding feasibility, the overall response rate for answering the beep signals of ESM was 44.5% in total. The missing rate per person varied from 13% to 97% with a median of 54.1%. Conclusion: The general evaluation and the user-friendliness revealed sufficient outcomes in favor of the ESM application. ESM seems a promising measurement tool to use in secondary chronic pain syndromes.

Physiotherapists Using the Biopsychosocial Model for Chronic Pain: Barriers and Facilitators-A Scoping Review.

The use of the biopsychosocial model in primary care physiotherapy for chronic pain is far from the recommendations given in research and current guidelines. To understand why physiotherapists have difficulty implementing a biopsychosocial approach, more insight is needed on the barriers and facilitators. This scoping review aimed to investigate and map these barriers and facilitators that physiotherapists working in primary care reportedly face when treating patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain from a biopsychosocial perspective. Four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and ERIC) and the grey literature were searched. Studies were included if they investigated the experiences of physiotherapists in the treatment of chronic pain from a biopsychosocial perspective in primary care. Extracted data were discussed and sub grouped in themes following a qualitative content analysis approach. To align with current use of theories on behavior change, the resulting themes were compared to the Theoretical Domains Framework. After screening, twenty-four studies were included. Eight groups of barriers and facilitators were identified, thematically clustered in six themes: knowledge, skills, and attitudes; environmental context and resources; role clarity; confidence; therapeutic alliance; and patient expectations. The results of this review can be used to inform the development of implementation programs.

Toward consensus on pain-related content in the pre-registration, undergraduate physical therapy curriculum: a Delphi-study.

BACKGROUND: Access to pain education for healthcare professionals is an International Association for the Study of Pain's key recommendation to improve pain care. The content of preregistration and undergraduate physical therapy pain curricula, however, is highly variable. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a list, by consensus, of essential pain-related topics for the undergraduate physical therapy curriculum. METHODS: A modified Delphi study was conducted in four rounds, including a Delphi Panel (N = 22) consisting of in pain experienced lecturers of preregistration undergraduate physical therapy of Universities of Applied Sciences in the Netherlands, and five Validation Panels. Round 1: topics were provided by the Delphi Panel, postgraduate pain educators, and a literature search. Rounds 2-4: the Delphi Panel rated the topics and commented. All topics were analyzed in terms of importance and degree of consensus. Validation Panels rated the outcome of Round 2. RESULTS: The Delphi Panel rated 257, 146, and 90 topics in Rounds 2, 3, and 4, respectively. This resulted in 71 topics judged as "not important," 97 as "important," and 89 as "highly important." In total, 63 topics were rated as "highly important" by the Delphi Panel and Validation Panels. CONCLUSION: A list was developed and can serve as a foundation for the development of comprehensive physical therapy pain curricula.

Exploring the feasibility of a network of organizations for pain rehabilitation: What are the lessons learned?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Integration of care is lacking for chronic musculoskeletal pain patients. Network Pain Rehabilitation Limburg, a transmural health care network, has been designed to provide integrated rehabilitation care from a biopsychosocial perspective to improve patients' levels of functioning. This feasibility study aims to provide insight into barriers and facilitators for the development, implementation, and transferability. METHODS: This study was conducted with a three-phase iterative and incremental design from October 2017 to October 2018. The network comprises two rehabilitation practices, and three local primary care networks, with a general practitioner together with, a mental health practice nurse, and a physiotherapist or exercise therapist. These stakeholders with a random sample of participating patients took part in evaluations, consisting of interviews, focus groups, and observations. Field notes and observations were recorded during meetings. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research guided data collection and analysis. Results were used to refine the next phase. RESULTS: According to health care professionals, guidelines and treatment protocols facilitate consistency and transparency in collaboration, biopsychosocial language, and treatment. One mentioned barrier is the stigmatization of chronic pain by the general population. In regular care, approaches are often more biomedical than biopsychosocial, causing patients to resist participating. The current organization of health care acts as a barrier, complicating implementation between and within practices. Health care professionals were enthusiastic about the iterative, bottom-up development. A critical mass of participating organizations is needed for proper implementation. CONCLUSION: Network Pain Rehabilitation Limburg is feasible in daily practice if barriers are overcome and facilitators of development, implementation, and transferability are promoted. These findings will be used to refine Network Pain Rehabilitation Limburg. A large-scale process and effect evaluation will be performed. Our implementation strategies and results may assist other health care organizations aspiring to implement a transmural network using a similar model. TRAIL REGISTRATION: Registration number: NTR6654 or https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NTR6654.

The Influence of Exercise Intensity on Psychosocial Outcomes in Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Psychosocial parameters play an important role in the onset and persistence of chronic musculoskeletal disorders (CMSDs). Exercise therapy is a valuable therapeutic modality as part of CMSD rehabilitation. Hereby, exercise intensity is an important factor regarding changes in pain and disability in multiple CMSDs. However, the impact of exercise intensity on psychosocial outcomes remains poorly explored. OBJECTIVE: To identify the effects of different modes of exercise intensity on psychosocial outcomes in persons with CMSDs. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was conducted up to November 2020 using the following databases: PubMed/MEDline, PEDro, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. STUDY SELECTION: Studies reporting exercise therapy in CMSDs with a predefined display of exercise intensity and an evaluation of at least 1 psychosocial outcome were included. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2a. DATA EXTRACTION: Data regarding demographics, exercise intensity, and psychosocial outcomes were included in a descriptive analysis. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. RESULTS: A total of 22 studies, involving 985 participants (with fibromyalgia, chronic low back pain, knee osteoarthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and axial spondyloarthritis) were included (mean PEDro score = 5.77/10). The most common psychosocial outcomes were quality of life (QoL) (n = 15), depression (n = 10), and anxiety (n = 9). QoL improved at any exercise intensity in persons with fibromyalgia. However, persons with fibromyalgia benefit more from exercising at low to moderate intensity regarding anxiety and depression. In contrast, persons with chronic low back pain benefit more from exercising at a higher intensity regarding QoL, anxiety, and depression. Other CMSDs only showed limited or conflicting results regarding the value of certain exercise intensities. CONCLUSION: Psychosocial outcomes are influenced by the intensity of exercise therapy in fibromyalgia and chronic low back pain, but effects differ across other CMSDs. Future research is necessary to determine the exercise intensity that yields optimal exercise therapy outcomes in specific CMSDs.

Longitudinal outcome evaluations of Interdisciplinary Multimodal Pain Treatment programmes for patients with chronic primary musculoskeletal pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Although Interdisciplinary Multimodal Pain Treatment (IMPT) programmes share a biopsychosocial approach to increase the wellbeing of patients with chronic pain, substantial variation in content and duration have been reported. In addition, it is unclear to what extent any favourable health outcomes are maintained over time. Therefore, our first aim was to identify and analyse the change over time of patient-related outcome measures in cohorts of patients who participated in IMPT programmes. Our second aim was to acquire insight into the heterogeneity of IMPT programmes. DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT: The study protocol was registered in Prospero under CRD42018076093. We searched Medline, Embase, PsycInfo and Cinahl from inception to May 2020. All study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessments were independently performed by two researchers. Study cohorts were eligible if they included adult patients with chronic primary musculoskeletal pain for at least 3 months. We assessed the change over time, by calculating pre-post, post-follow-up and pre-follow-up contrasts for seven different patient-reported outcome domains. To explore the variability between the IMPT programmes, we summarized the patient characteristics and treatment programmes using the intervention description and replication checklist. RESULTS: The majority of the 72 included patient cohorts significantly improved during treatment. Importantly, this improvement was generally maintained at follow-up. In line with our expectations and with previous studies, we observed substantial methodological and statistical heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that participation in an IMPT programme is associated with considerable improvements in wellbeing that are generally maintained at follow-up. The current study also found substantial heterogeneity in dose and treatment content, which suggests different viewpoints on how to optimally design an IMPT programme. SIGNIFICANCE: The current study provides insight into the different existing approaches regarding the dose and content of IMPT programs. This analysis contributes to an increased understanding of the various approaches by which a biopsychosocial perspective on chronic pain can be translated to treatment programs. Furthermore, despite theoretical and empirical assertions regarding the difficulty to maintain newly learned health behaviors over time, the longitudinal analysis of health outcomes did not find a relapse pattern for patients who participated in IMPT programs.

An eCoach-Pain for Patients with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain in Interdisciplinary Primary Care: A Feasibility Study.

eHealth could support cost-effective interdisciplinary primary care for patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. This study aims to explore the feasibility of the eCoach-Pain, comprising a tool measuring pain complexity, diaries, pain education sessions, monitoring options, and chat function. Feasibility was evaluated (June-December 2020) by assessing learnability, usability, desirability, adherence to the application, and experiences from patients and general practitioners, practice nurses mental health, and physiotherapists. Six primary healthcare professionals (PHCPs) from two settings participated in the study and recruited 29 patients (72% female, median age 50.0 years (IQR = 24.0)). PHCPs participated in a focus group. Patient data was collected by evaluation questionnaires, individual interviews, and eCoach-Pain-use registration. Patients used the eCoach during the entire treatment phase (on average 107.0 days (IQR = 46.0); 23 patients completed the pain complexity tool and used the educational sessions, and 12 patients the chat function. Patients were satisfied with the eCoach-Pain (median grade 7.0 (IQR = 2.8) on a 0-10 scale) and made some recommendations for better fit with patient-specific complaints. According to PHCPs, the eCoach-Pain is of added value to their treatment, and patients also see treatment benefits. However, the implementation strategy is important for successful use of the eCoach-Pain. It is recommended to improve this strategy and involve a case-manager per patient.

Attitudes and beliefs on low back pain in physical therapy education: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Prescription behavior in low back pain (LBP) differs between physical therapists with a biomedical versus a biopsychosocial belief, despite the presence of clinical guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To examine (1) the beliefs of physical therapy students and their adherence to clinical LBP guidelines in Belgium and the Netherlands; (2) whether the beliefs and attitudes of physical therapy students change during education; (3) whether beliefs are related to guideline adherence; (4) whether beliefs and attitudes differ with or without a personal history of LBP. METHODS: A cross-sectional design included students in the 2nd and 4th year of physical therapy education in 6 Belgian and 2 Dutch institutions. To quantify beliefs, the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale, the Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale, and a clinical case vignette were used. RESULTS: In total, 1624 students participated. (1) Only 47% of physical therapy students provide clinical guidelines' consistent recommendations for activity and 16% for work. (2) 2nd year students score higher on the biomedical subscales and lower on the psychosocial subscale. 4th year students make more guideline consistent recommendations about work and activity. (3) Students with a more biopsychosocial belief give more guideline adherent recommendations. (4) Personal experience with LBP is not associated with different beliefs or attitudes. CONCLUSIONS: A positive shift occurs from a merely biomedical model towards a more biopsychosocial model from the 2nd to the 4th year of physical therapy education. However, guideline adherence concerning activity and work recommendations remains low.

Exploring the Feasibility of Relapse Prevention Strategies in Interdisciplinary Multimodal Pain Therapy Programs: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Although interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment (IMPT) programs are widely regarded as treatment of choice for patients with chronic pain, there are signs that many patients are unable to maintain their treatment gains in the long term. To facilitate the maintenance of positive treatment outcomes over time, we developed two relapse prevention strategies. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to explore the feasibility of these strategies within the context of IMPT programs. METHODS: We performed a feasibility study using 3 workbook prototypes containing either one or both strategies. For a period of 6 months, the workbooks were made available in two IMPT facilities. Qualitative data were collected through a focus group and semistructured interviews. We performed a thematic analysis using a deductive approach with (1) applicability to the treatment program, (2) acceptability of the workbook content, and (3) form, as predefined themes. RESULTS: The final dataset consisted of transcripts from a focus group with health care providers and 11 telephone interviews and 2 additional in-depth interviews with patients. In general, the intervention was perceived as useful, easy to use, and in line with the treatment program. The data also include suggestions to further improve the use of both strategies, including more specific implementation guidelines, revised goal-setting procedure, and development of a mobile health version. However, several factors, including a high dropout rate and small sample size, impact the external validity of our findings. CONCLUSIONS: This study should be regarded as a first step in the process of transforming the prototype workbook into an effective intervention for clinical practice. Although these initial results indicate a favorable evaluation of both behavior regulation strategies within the workbook, this study encountered multiple barriers regarding implementation and data collection that limit the generalizability of these results. Future research efforts should specifically address the fidelity of HCPs and patients and should include clear procedures regarding recruitment and use of both relapse prevention strategies during treatment.

Mobile Health App (AGRIPPA) to Prevent Relapse After Successful Interdisciplinary Treatment for Patients With Chronic Pain: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: To facilitate adherence to adaptive pain management behaviors after interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment, we developed a mobile health app (AGRIPPA app) that contains two behavior regulation strategies. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this project are (1) to test the effectiveness of the AGRIPPA app on pain disability; (2) to determine the cost-effectiveness; and (3) to explore the levels of engagement and usability of app users. METHODS: We will perform a multicenter randomized controlled trial with two parallel groups. Within the 12-month inclusion period, we plan to recruit 158 adult patients with chronic pain during the initial stage of their interdisciplinary treatment program in one of the 6 participating centers. Participants will be randomly assigned to the standard treatment condition or to the enhanced treatment condition in which they will receive the AGRIPPA app. Patients will be monitored from the start of the treatment program until 12 months posttreatment. In our primary analysis, we will evaluate the difference over time of pain-related disability between the two conditions. Other outcome measures will include health-related quality of life, illness perceptions, pain self-efficacy, app system usage data, productivity loss, and health care expenses. RESULTS: The study was approved by the local Medical Research Ethics Committee in October 2019. As of March 20, 2020, we have recruited 88 patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study will be the first step in systematically evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of the AGRIPPA app. After 3 years of development and feasibility testing, this formal evaluation will help determine to what extent the app will influence the maintenance of treatment gains over time. The outcomes of this trial will guide future decisions regarding uptake in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NL8076; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8076. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/18632.

Biopsychosocial baseline values of 15 000 patients suffering from chronic pain: Dutch DataPain study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Chronic pain affects many adults. To improve our daily practice, we need to understand multidisciplinary approaches, integrated treatment plans and the biopsychosocial context of these patients. To date, almost 15 000 chronic pain patients have been referred to the Maastricht University Pain Center in the Netherlands. METHODS: This study describes 11 214 of these patients suffering from chronic pain. Chronic pain was analyzed using relevant Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials instruments. RESULTS: Most patients were female (59.3%). The prevalence of low education was 59%, and unemployment/disability was 35.9%. The mean age was 55.6 years. Severe pain (Numerical Rating Sale score 7-10) was reported by 71.9% of the patients; psychological and quality of life values deteriorated when pain severity increased. Approximately 36% of patients showed severe signs of depression or anxiety, and 39% displayed high pain catastrophizing. Of all patients, 17.8% reported high values for pain severity, catastrophizing and anxiety or depression. CONCLUSIONS: Based on baseline biopsychosocial values, this study shows the complexity of patients referred to pain centers. Pain management with a biopsychosocial approach in an integrated multidisciplinary setting is indispensable. Above all, adjusted education on chronic pain and attention to its biopsychosocial aspects are deemed necessary.

The responsiveness and interpretability of psychosocial patient-reported outcome measures in chronic musculoskeletal pain rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: For several widely used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMSP) rehabilitation, it is still not known whether they are responsive to change, and what the smallest detectable change (SDC) and minimal clinically important change (MCIC) are. Knowledge of these values can be used to accurately interpret change scores in research and clinical practice. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, the responsiveness, the SDC and the MCIC of the mental components of the Research and Development 36-Item Health Survey (RAND-36), the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) and the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK) were investigated in CMSP patients. Responsiveness, the SDC and MCIC were determined by using both anchor and distribution-based methods. RESULTS: For all outcome measures, there was a progression from smallest to largest mean change scores between participants who did not perceive change and those who reported change after treatment. However, correlations of the Global Perceived Effect (GPE) with the change scores on the outcome measures were low. For all outcome measures, the SDC was larger than the MCIC. CONCLUSIONS: For this population, the questionnaires were shown not to be responsive. Furthermore, the questionnaires appeared not to be able to distinguish clinically important change from measurement error in individual patients. The finding of large measurement errors of PROMs is in line with previous research in pain rehabilitation. Using generic PROMs only, to examine changes in psychosocial status due to a pain rehabilitation programme, is therefore questionable. SIGNIFICANCE: This study shows that widely used generic psychosocial PROMs might not be responsive and not able to distinguish clinically important change from measurement error in individual chronic musculoskeletal pain patients. It therefore seems reasonable to reconsider the (compulsory) use of these PROMs for assessing the quality of pain rehabilitation programmes, and necessary to consider other, more objective, outcome measures for this purpose in this population.

Improving patient-practitioner interaction in chronic pain rehabilitation.

Stimulating patients to approach their pain from a biopsychosocial perspective is central to chronic pain rehabilitation. However, conversations between patients and their healthcare professionals about the social and psychological factors that may contribute to the continuation of pain and disability can be challenging. The current scientific literature does not sufficiently pinpoint the difficulties in patient-practitioner interaction on chronic pain, and it falls short of answering the question of how a joint exploration of the social and psychological factors that might be involved in the patient's pain and evolving disability can be enhanced. In this theoretical article, we introduce discursive psychology as a potentially valuable research perspective to gain a better understanding of the difficulties in patient-practitioner interaction in the context of chronic pain rehabilitation. Discursive psychology focuses on features of people's talk (e.g. that of patients and practitioners) and is concerned with the social practices that people perform as part of a specific interactional context. In this paper, we provide an introduction to the main theoretical notions of discursive psychology. We illustrate how discursive psychological analyses can inform our understanding of the specific sensitivities in conversations between patients with chronic pain and their practitioners. Finally, we address how a better understanding of these sensitivities offers a gateway towards improving these conversations.

Developing the Network Pain Rehabilitation Limburg: a feasibility study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Patients having chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) face challenges as mismatches often exist between the complexity of patient's pain problem and the rehabilitation treatment offered. This can result in less efficient care for the patient and increased medical shopping. The Network Pain Rehabilitation Limburg (NPRL), a transmural integrated healthcare network, will be designed to improve daily care for patients with CMP. NPRL focusses on improving patient's level of functioning despite pain by stimulating a biopsychosocial approach given by all involved healthcare professionals. A feasibility study will be performed which will give insight into the barriers and facilitators, perceived value, acceptability and implementation strategies for NPRL. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study has a three-phase iterative and incremental design, based on key principles of a user-centred design. Mixed methods will be used in which healthcare professionals and patients involved in NPRL will participate. In phase 1, NPRL will be developed and healthcare professionals educated. Phase 2 focusses on the implementation and phase 3 on the transferability of NPRL. In addition, preliminary data on patient's work status, general health and participation level will be collected. The qualitative results of each phase will be analysed following the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and will be used to refine NPRL in daily practise. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. The results of this feasibility study will form the basis for refinement of NPRL and planning of a large-scale process and effect evaluation of the Quadruple Aim outcomes. Dissemination will include publications and presentations at national and international conferences. Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Medical Ethics Committee Z, the Netherlands, METC 17 N-133.

Quality indicators to assess quality of pain clinic care from the perspective of patients with chronic pain: development, usability, comprehensibility, and psychometric quality of the QiPPP questionnaire.

To address the lack of appropriate patient-defined quality indicators (QIs) for assessment of pain clinic care in the Netherlands, we developed the "Quality Indicators Pain Patients' Perspective" (QiPPP) questionnaire. Quality indicators are widely used to measure the quality of the structure, process, and outcome of health care. The Pain Patient United Consortium, together with the University Pain Centre of Maastricht, developed QIs for assessment of care. The aim of this study was to develop QIs from the perspective of patients with chronic pain for assessment of the care provided by a pain clinic, and to validate them on usability, comprehensibility, and psychometric quality in daily pain practice. Quality as defined by patients with chronic pain (in survey and focus groups) was prioritized by consensus and transformed into QI. A first set was tested and fine-tuned, resulting in the QiPPP questionnaire. Five participating pain clinics distributed 200 questionnaires among consecutive patients with chronic pain under treatment. To examine the dimensionality of the QIs, patient responses were analyzed on the basis of reporting frequencies and findings of principal component analysis. For construct validation, the influence of patient characteristics was observed in 3 components. A total of 547 (54.7%) populated QiPPP questionnaires (response rate, 58.9%) were analyzed. The mean score for patient comprehensibility was 8.6 ± 1.4. The final QiPPP questionnaire included 21 QIs (18 process; 3 outcome) distributed over 7 domains. The QiPPP questionnaire was of sufficient psychometric quality and found to be useful and understandable by patients with chronic pain.

Motor imagery performance and tactile acuity in patients with complaints of arms, neck and shoulder.

AIM: This study aims to gain more knowledge of the sensorimotor incongruence in patients with chronic nonspecific complaints of arm, neck and shoulder. METHOD: Seven patients and seven healthy controls performed a left/right judgment task, and tactile acuity was assessed by the two-point discrimination threshold at fingers and shoulders. RESULTS & CONCLUSION: The results suggest a decreased tactile acuity in patients with chronic nonspecific complaints of arm, neck and shoulder and a faster reaction time at the painful arm, which might imply disturbed information processing of sensory and motor feedback. Due to the small sample size and low scores on the pain and disability questionnaires, these conclusions should be interpreted with care. Further research is recommended.

EULAR recommendations for the health professional's approach to pain management in inflammatory arthritis and osteoarthritis.

Pain is the predominant symptom for people with inflammatory arthritis (IA) and osteoarthritis (OA) mandating the development of evidence-based recommendations for the health professional's approach to pain management. A multidisciplinary task force including professionals and patient representatives conducted a systematic literature review of systematic reviews to evaluate evidence regarding effects on pain of multiple treatment modalities. Overarching principles and recommendations regarding assessment and pain treatment were specified on the basis of reviewed evidence and expert opinion. From 2914 review studies initially identified, 186 met inclusion criteria. The task force emphasised the importance for the health professional to adopt a patient-centred framework within a biopsychosocial perspective, to have sufficient knowledge of IA and OA pathogenesis, and to be able to differentiate localised and generalised pain. Treatment is guided by scientific evidence and the assessment of patient needs, preferences and priorities; pain characteristics; previous and ongoing pain treatments; inflammation and joint damage; and psychological and other pain-related factors. Pain treatment options typically include education complemented by physical activity and exercise, orthotics, psychological and social interventions, sleep hygiene education, weight management, pharmacological and joint-specific treatment options, or interdisciplinary pain management. Effects on pain were most uniformly positive for physical activity and exercise interventions, and for psychological interventions. Effects on pain for educational interventions, orthotics, weight management and multidisciplinary treatment were shown for particular disease groups. Underpinned by available systematic reviews and meta-analyses, these recommendations enable health professionals to provide knowledgeable pain-management support for people with IA and OA.

The development of a patient-specific method for physiotherapy goal setting: a user-centered design.

PURPOSE: To deliver client-centered care, physiotherapists need to identify the patients' individual treatment goals. However, practical tools for involving patients in goal setting are lacking. The purpose of this study was to improve the frequently used Patient-Specific Complaints instrument in Dutch physiotherapy, and to develop it into a feasible method to improve physiotherapy goal setting. METHODS: An iterative user-centered design was conducted in co-creation with the physiotherapists and patients, in three phases. Their needs and preferences were identified by means of group meetings and questionnaires. The new method was tested in several field tests in physiotherapy practices. RESULTS: Four main objectives for improvement were formulated: clear instructions for the administration procedure, targeted use across the physiotherapy process, client-activating communication skills, and a client-centered attitude of the physiotherapist. A theoretical goal-setting framework and elements of shared decision making were integrated into the new-called, Patient-Specific Goal-setting method, together with a practical training course. CONCLUSIONS: The user-centered approach resulted in a goal-setting method that is fully integrated in the physiotherapy process. The new goal-setting method contributes to a more structured approach to goal setting and enables patient participation and goal-oriented physiotherapy. Before large-scale implementation, its feasibility in physiotherapy practice needs to be investigated. Implications for rehabilitation Involving patients and physiotherapists in the development and testing of a goal-setting method, increases the likelihood of its feasibility in practice. The integration of a goal-setting method into the physiotherapy process offers the opportunity to focus more fully on the patient's goals. Patients should be informed about the aim of every step of the goal-setting process in order to increase their awareness and involvement. Training physiotherapists to use a patient-specific method for goal setting is crucial for a correct application.