Patients' and clinicians' experiences with stratified exercise therapy in knee osteoarthritis: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: We have developed a model of stratified exercise therapy that distinguishes three knee osteoarthritis (OA) subgroups ('high muscle strength subgroup', 'low muscle strength subgroup', 'obesity subgroup'), which are provided subgroup-specific exercise therapy (supplemented by a dietary intervention for the 'obesity subgroup'). In a large clinical trial, this intervention was found to be no more effective than usual exercise therapy. The present qualitative study aimed to explore experiences from users of this intervention, in order to identify possible improvements. METHODS: Qualitative research design embedded within a cluster randomized controlled trial in a primary care setting. A random sample from the experimental arm (i.e., 15 patients, 11 physiotherapists and 5 dieticians) was interviewed on their experiences with receiving or applying the intervention. Qualitative data from these semi-structured interviews were thematically analysed. RESULTS: We identified four themes: one theme regarding the positive experiences with the intervention and three themes regarding perceived barriers. Although users from all 3 perspectives (patients, physiotherapists and dieticians) generally perceived the intervention as having added value, we also identified several barriers, especially for the 'obesity subgroup'. In this 'obesity subgroup', physiotherapists perceived obesity as difficult to address, dieticians reported that more consultations are needed to reach sustainable weight loss and both physiotherapists and dieticians reported a lack of interprofessional collaboration. In the 'high muscle strength subgroup', the low number of supervised sessions was perceived as a barrier by some patients and physiotherapists, but as a facilitator by others. A final theme addressed barriers to knee OA treatment in general, with lack of motivation as the most prominent of these. CONCLUSION: Our qualitative study revealed a number of barriers to effective application of the stratified exercise therapy, especially for the 'obesity subgroup'. Based on these barriers, the intervention and its implementation could possibly be improved. Moreover, these barriers are likely to account at least partly for the lack of superiority over usual exercise therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Netherlands National Trial Register (NTR): NL7463 (date of registration: 8 January 2019).

Illness perceptions; exploring mediators and/or moderators in disabling persistent low back pain. Multiple baseline single-case experimental design.

INTRODUCTION: Illness Perceptions (IPs) may play a role in the management of persistent low back pain. The mediation and/or moderation effect of IPs on primary outcomes in physiotherapy treatment is unknown. METHODS: A multiple single-case experimental design, using a matched care physiotherapy intervention, with three phases (phases A-B-A') was used including a 3 month follow up (phase A'). Primary outcomes: pain intensity, physical functioning and pain interference in daily life. Analyzes: linear mixed models, adjusted for fear of movement, catastrophizing, avoidance, sombreness and sleep. RESULTS: Nine patients were included by six different primary care physiotherapists. Repeated measures on 196 data points showed that IPs Consequences, Personal control, Identity, Concern and Emotional response had a mediation effect on all three primary outcomes. The IP Personal control acted as a moderator for all primary outcomes, with clinically relevant improvements at 3 month follow up. CONCLUSION: Our study might indicate that some IPs have a mediating or a moderating effect on the outcome of a matched care physiotherapy treatment. Assessing Personal control at baseline, as a relevant moderator for the outcome prognosis of successful physiotherapy management of persistent low back pain, should be further eplored.

Limited predictive value of illness perceptions for short-term poor recovery in musculoskeletal pain. A multi-center longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal pain (MSP) is recognized worldwide as a major cause of increased years lived with disability. In addition to known generic prognostic factors, illness perceptions (IPs) may have predictive value for poor recovery in MSP. We were interested in the added predictive value of baseline IPs, over and above the known generic prognostic factors, on clinical recovery from MSP. Also, it is hypothesized there may be overlap between IPs and domains covered by the Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ), measuring distress, depression, anxiety and somatization. The aim of this study is twofold; 1) to assess the added predictive value of IPs for poor recovery and 2) to assess differences in predictive value for poor recovery between the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire - Dutch Language Version (Brief IPQ-DLV) and the 4DSQ. METHODS: An eligible sample of 251 patients with musculoskeletal pain attending outpatient physical therapy were included in a multi-center longitudinal cohort study. Pain intensity, physical functioning and Global Perceived Effect were the primary outcomes. Hierarchical logistic regression models were used to assess the added value of baseline IPs for predicting poor recovery. To investigate the performance of the models, the levels of calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshov test) and discrimination (Area under the Curve (AUC)) were assessed. RESULTS: Baseline 'Treatment Control' added little predictive value for poor recovery in pain intensity [Odds Ratio (OR) 0.80 (Confidence Interval (CI) 0.66-0.97), increase in AUC 2%] and global perceived effect [OR 0.78 (CI 0.65-0.93), increase in AUC 3%]. Baseline 'Timeline' added little predictive value for poor recovery in physical functioning [OR 1.16 (CI 1.03-1.30), increase in AUC 2%]. There was a non-significant difference between AUCs in predictive value for poor recovery between the Brief IPQ-DLV and the 4DSQ. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of this explorative study, assessing baseline IPs, over and above the known generic prognostic factors, does not result in a substantial improvement in the prediction of poor recovery. Also, no recommendations can be given for preferring either the 4DSQ or the Brief IPQ-DLV to assess psychological factors.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of measurement properties of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score - Physical Function Shortform (HOOS-PS) and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score - Physical Function Shortform (KOOS-PS).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate all evidence on measurement properties of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score - Physical function Shortform (HOOS-PS) and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score - Physical function Shortform (KOOS-PS). DESIGN: This study was conducted according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs. MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL and PsychINFO through February 2019 were searched. Eligible studies evaluated patients with hip or knee complaints and described a measurement property, interpretability, feasibility, or the development of either the HOOS-PS or KOOS-PS. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were included. For both questionnaires, the content validity was found inconsistent and the quality evidence was moderate for a sufficient reliability and high for an insufficient construct validity. The HOOS-PS had a high quality evidence of sufficient structural validity and internal consistency (pooled Cronbach's alpha 0.80; n = 3761) and low quality evidence of sufficient measurement error and indeterminate responsiveness. Concerning the KOOS-PS, the quality evidence was high for an insufficient responsiveness, moderate for an inconsistent structural validity and internal consistency and low for an inconsistent measurement error. CONCLUSIONS: The inconsistent evidence for content validity implies that scores on the HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS may inadequately reflect physical functioning. Furthermore, there is evidence for insufficient construct validity and responsiveness in patients with knee osteoarthritis receiving conservative treatment. Using the HOOS-PS or KOOS-PS as outcome measurement instruments for comparing outcomes, measuring improvements or benchmarking in patients with hip or knee complaints or undergoing arthroplasty should only be done with great caution. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO number CRD42017069539.

The longitudinal relationships between pain severity and disability versus health-related quality of life and costs among chronic low back pain patients.

PURPOSE: Previous studies found higher levels of pain severity and disability to be associated with higher costs and lower health-related quality of life. However, these findings were based on cross-sectional data and little is known about the longitudinal relationships between pain severity and disability versus health-related quality of life and costs among chronic low back pain patients. This study aims to cover this knowledge gap by exploring these longitudinal relationships in a consecutive cohort. METHODS: Data of 6316 chronic low back pain patients were used. Measurements took place at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Pain severity (Numeric pain rating scale; range: 0-100), disability (Oswestry disability index; range: 0-100), health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-3L: range: 0-1), societal and healthcare costs (cost questionnaire) were measured. Using linear generalized estimating equation analyses, longitudinal relationships were explored between: (1) pain severity and health-related quality of life, (2) disability and health-related quality of life, (3) pain severity and societal costs, (4) disability and societal costs, (5) pain severity and healthcare costs, and (6) disability and healthcare costs. RESULTS: Higher pain and disability levels were statistically significantly related with poorer health-related quality of life (pain intensity: - 0.0041; 95% CI - 0.0043 to - 0.0039; disability: - 0.0096; 95% CI - 0.0099 to - 0.0093), higher societal costs (pain intensity: 7; 95% CI 5 to 8; disability: 23; 95% CI 20 to 27) and higher healthcare costs (pain intensity: 3; 95% CI 2 to 4; disability: 9; 95% CI 7 to 11). CONCLUSION: Pain and disability were longitudinally related to health-related quality of life, societal costs, and healthcare costs. Disability had a stronger association with all outcomes compared to pain.

Do socio-demographic characteristics and/or health status explain the magnitude of differences between patient and general public utility values? A chronic low back pain patients case study.

BACKGROUND: Utility values can be obtained from different respondent groups, including patients and members of the general public. Evidence suggests that patient values are typically higher than general public values. This study explores whether the magnitude of disagreement between both values can be explained by socio-demographic characteristics and/or health status. METHODS: Data of 5037 chronic low back pain patients were used. Self-reported EQ-VAS was employed as a proxy of patients' preference for their own health state. General public values for the patients' EQ-5D-3L health states were obtained using the Dutch VAS-based tariff. The difference between patient and general public values was assessed using a paired t-test. Subsequently, this difference was used as a dependent variable and regressed upon dummy variables of socio-demographic and health status characteristics. Coefficients represented age, gender, education level, social support, back pain intensity, leg pain intensity, functional status, comorbidities, catastrophizing, and treatment expectations. RESULTS: Patient values were higher than general public values (0.069; 95%CI:0.063-0.076). The magnitude of disagreement between both values was associated with age, gender, education level, social support, functional status, and comorbidities, but not with back pain intensity, leg pain intensity, catastrophizing, and treatment expectations. CONCLUSIONS: Patients were found to value their own health status higher than members of the general public. The magnitude of disagreement between both values was found to differ by various socio-demographic and/or health status characteristics. This suggest that patient characteristics account for a relevant fraction of the identified disagreements between patient and general public values, and that mechanisms thought to be responsible for these disagreements, such as adaptation and response shift, have a differential impact across patient sub-groups.

Quality of life in a broader perspective: Does ASCOT reflect the capability approach?

PURPOSE: Economic evaluation of services and interventions in care services tends to focus on quality of life(QoL) based on health-related measures such as EQ5D, with a major focus on health and functioning. The Capability Approach (CA) provides an alternative framework for measuring QoL and challenges some of the conventional issues in the current practice of measurement of QoL. The Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) aims to measure social care-related QoL in a broad sense. This article investigates whether and, if so, how the ASCOT addresses issues put on the agenda by the CA. METHODS: Literature analysis concerning theoretical assumptions and arguments of CA and ASCOT. RESULTS: The Capability Approach (CA) puts three issues on the agenda regarding QoL. First, the focus of evaluation should not be on functioning, but on freedom of choice. Second, evaluation should be critical about adaptive preferences, which entail that people lower expectations in situations of limited possibilities. Third, evaluation should not only address health, but also other domains of life. Our analysis shows that freedom of choice is reflected in the response option 'as I want' in the ASCOT questionnaire. The problem of adaptive preferences is countered in the ASCOT by developing a standard based on preferences of the general population. Third, the ASCOT contains several domains of life. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the CA and the ASCOT contribute to the discussion on QoL, and that the ASCOT operationalizes core assumptions of the CA, translating the issues raised by the CA in a practical way.

Patient versus general population health state valuations: a case study of non-specific low back pain.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to compare non-specific low back pain (LBP) patients' health state valuations with those of the general population, and (2) to explore how aspects of health-related quality of life as measured by the EQ-5D-3L impact non-specific LBP patient valuations. METHODS: Data were used of a randomized controlled trial, including 483 non-specific LBP patients. Outcomes included the EQ-VAS and the EQ-5D-3L. Patient valuations were derived from the EQ-VAS. Population valuations were derived from the EQ-5D-3L using a Dutch VAS-based tariff. The difference between patient and population valuations was assessed using t tests. An OLS linear regression model was constructed to explore how various aspects of health-related quality of life as measured by the ED-5D-3L impact non-specific LBP patient valuations. RESULTS: Non-specific LBP patients valued their health states 0.098 (95% CI 0.082-0.115) points higher than the general population. Only 22.2% of the variance in patient valuations was explained by the patients' EQ-5D-3L health states (R 2 = 0.222). Non-specific LBP patients gave the most weight to the anxiety/depression dimension. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that non-specific LBP patients value their health states higher than members of the general population and that the choice of valuation method could have important implications for cost-effectiveness analyses and thus for clinical practice.

Cost-effectiveness of manual therapy versus physiotherapy in patients with sub-acute and chronic neck pain: a randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of manual therapy according to the Utrecht School (MTU) in comparison with physiotherapy (PT) in sub-acute and chronic non-specific neck pain patients from a societal perspective. METHODS: An economic evaluation was conducted alongside a 52-week randomized controlled trial, in which 90 patients were randomized to the MTU group and 91 to the PT group. Clinical outcomes included perceived recovery (yes/no), functional status (continuous and yes/no), and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs were measured from a societal perspective using self-reported questionnaires. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. To estimate statistical uncertainty, bootstrapping techniques were used. RESULTS: After 52 weeks, there were no significant between-group differences in clinical outcomes. During follow-up, intervention costs (ß:€-32; 95 %CI: -54 to -10) and healthcare costs (ß:€-126; 95 %CI: -235 to -32) were significantly lower in the MTU group than in the PT group, whereas unpaid productivity costs were significantly higher (ß:€186; 95 %CI:19-557). Societal costs did not significantly differ between groups (ß:€-96; 95 %CI:-1975-2022). For QALYs and functional status (yes/no), the maximum probability of MTU being cost-effective in comparison with PT was low (≤0.54). For perceived recovery (yes/no) and functional status (continuous), a large amount of money must be paid per additional unit of effect to reach a reasonable probability of cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: From a societal perspective, MTU was not cost-effective in comparison with PT in patients with sub-acute and chronic non-specific neck pain for perceived recovery, functional status, and QALYs. As no clear total societal cost and effect differences were found between MTU and PT, the decision about what intervention to administer, reimburse, and/or implement can be based on the preferences of the patient and the decision-maker at hand. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00713843.

How do low back pain patients conceptualize their expectations regarding treatment? Content analysis of interviews.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to gain insight into how low back pain (LBP) patients conceptualize the construct of expectations regarding treatment. METHODS: This study was nested within a mixed-method randomized clinical trial comparing three primary care interventions for LBP. A total of 77 participants with LBP lasting longer than 6 weeks were included; semi-structured interviews were conducted querying patients about their expectations for treatment. Also factors influencing their expectations were explored. Interviews were administered following enrollment into the study, but prior to study treatment. Two researchers independently conducted a content analysis using NVIVO 9 software. RESULTS: LBP patients' expectations could be categorized in two main domains: outcome and process expectations, each with subdomains. Patients expressed expectations in all subdomains both as values (what they hoped) and probabilities (what they thought was likely). In multiple subdomains, there were differences in the nature (positive vs. negative) and frequency of value and probability expectations. Participants reported that multiple factors influenced their expectations of which past experience with treatment appeared to be of major influence on probability expectations. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: This study showed that LBP patients' expectations for treatment are multifaceted. Current measurement instruments do not cover all domains and subdomains of expectations. Therefore, we recommend the development of new or improved measures that make a distinction between value and probability expectations and assess process and/or outcome expectations covering multiple subdomains. Some of the influencing factors found in this study may be useful targets for altering patients' treatment expectations and improving health outcomes.

Characteristics and health outcomes associated with activation for self-management in patients with non-specific low back pain: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Research has shown that the course of non-specific low back pain (LBP) is influenced by, among other factors, patients' self-management abilities. Therefore, clinical guidelines recommend stimulation of self-management. Enhancing patients' self-management potentially can improve patients' health outcomes and reduce future healthcare costs for non-specific LBP. OBJECTIVES: Which characteristics and health outcomes are associated with activation for self-management in patients with non-specific LBP? DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHOD: Patients with non-specific LBP applying for primary care physiotherapy were asked to participate. Multivariable linear regression analysis was performed to analyze the multivariable relationship between activation for self-management (Patient Activation Measure, range 0-100) and a range of characteristics, e.g., age, gender, and health outcomes, e.g., self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing. RESULTS: The median activation for self-management score of the patients with non-specific LBP (N = 208) was 63.10 (IQR = 19.30) points. The multivariable linear regression analysis revealed that higher self-efficacy scores (B = 0.54), female gender (B = 3.64), and a middle educational level compared with a high educational level (B = -5.47) were associated with better activation for self-management in patients with non-specific LBP. The goodness-of-fit of the model was 17.24% (R2 = 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with better activation for self-management had better self-efficacy, had a higher educational level, and were more often female. However, given the explained variance better understanding of the factors that influence the complex construct of self-management behaviour in patients who are not doing well might be needed to identify possible barriers to engage in self-management.

The (cost-)effectiveness of combined lifestyle interventions for people with persistent low-back pain who are overweight or obese: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Lifestyle factors are expected to contribute to the persistence and burden of low-back pain (LBP). However, there are no systematic reviews on the (cost-)effectiveness of combined lifestyle interventions for overweight or obese people with LBP. AIM: To assess whether combined lifestyle interventions are (cost-)effective for people with persistent LBP who are overweight or obese, based on a systematic review. DESIGN: Systematic review METHOD: PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Wiley/Cochrane Library were searched from database inception till January 6th 2023. Two independent reviewers performed study selection, data-extraction and risk of bias scoring using the Cochrane RoB tool 2 and/or the Consensus Health Economic Criteria list. GRADE was used to assess the level of certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: In total 2510 records were screened, and 4 studies on 3 original RCTs with 216 participants were included. Low certainty evidence (1 study) showed that combined lifestyle interventions were not superior to usual care for physical functioning, pain and lifestyle outcomes. Compared to usual care, moderate certainty evidence showed that healthcare (-$292, 95%CI: 872; -33), medication (-$30, 95% CI -65; -4) and absenteeism costs (-$1000, 95%CI: 3573; -210) were lower for the combined lifestyle interventions. CONCLUSION: There is low certainty evidence from 3 studies with predominantly small sample sizes, short follow-up and low intervention adherence that combined lifestyle interventions are not superior to physical functioning, pain and lifestyle outcomes compared to usual care, but are likely to be cost-effective.

Illness perceptions associated with patient burden with musculoskeletal pain in outpatient physical therapy practice, a cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Musculoskeletal pain (MSP) is a burden to patients and to society. In addition to well-known prognostic factors, illness perceptions (IPs) may be associated with pain intensity and physical functioning in MSP but their role is not fully understood. Our research focused on these questions: 1) Do IPs differ between patients with acute, sub-acute and persistent MSP 2) Are IPs, in addition to well-known prognostic factors, associated with pain intensity and with limitations in physical functioning? METHODS: Eligible MSP patients from 29 physical therapy practices were invited to participate in a cross-sectional study. IPs were measured with the Brief IPQ-DLV. We compared IPs between patients with acute, sub-acute and persistent MSP (1-way ANOVA with Tukey post-hoc tests). Secondly, associations between IPs with pain intensity and physical functioning were assessed (multiple linear regression). RESULTS: With 658 participants, most IP dimensions showed small differences between acute, sub-acute or persistent pain. For pain intensity, the IP dimensions Consequences, Identity and Comprehensibility explained an additional 13.3% of the variance. For physical functioning, the dimensions Consequences, Treatment Control, Identity and Concern explained an additional 26.5% of the variance. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Most IP dimensions showed small differences between acute, sub-acute or persistent pain. In addition to some well-known prognostic variables, higher scores on some IP dimensions are associated with higher pain intensity and more limitations in physical functioning in patients with MSP. Longitudinal studies are needed to explore the longitudinal associations.

Systematic review of patient history and physical examination to diagnose chronic low back pain originating from the facet joints.

Patient history and physical examination are frequently used procedures to diagnose chronic low back pain (CLBP) originating from the facet joints, although the diagnostic accuracy is controversial. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of patient history and/or physical examination to identify CLBP originating from the facet joints using diagnostic blocks as reference standard. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and the Cochrane Collaboration database from inception until June 2016. Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We calculated sensitivity and specificity values, with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Twelve studies were included, in which 129 combinations of index tests and reference standards were presented. Most of these index tests have only been evaluated in single studies with a high risk of bias. Four studies evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the Revel's criteria combination. Because of the clinical heterogeneity, results were not pooled. The published sensitivities ranged from 0.11 (95% CI 0.02-0.29) to 1.00 (95% CI 0.75-1.00), and the specificities ranged from 0.66 (95% CI 0.46-0.82) to 0.91 (95% CI 0.83-0.96). Due to clinical heterogeneity, the evidence for the diagnostic accuracy of patient history and/or physical examination to identify facet joint pain is inconclusive. Patient history and physical examination cannot be used to limit the need of a diagnostic block. The validity of the diagnostic facet joint block should be studied, and high quality studies are required to confirm the results of single studies. SIGNIFICANCE: Patient history and physical examination cannot be used to limit the need of a diagnostic block. The validity of the diagnostic facet joint block should be studied, and high quality studies are required to confirm the results of single studies.

Health economic evidence gaps and methodological constraints in low back pain and neck pain: Results of the Research Agenda for Health Economic Evaluation (RAHEE) project.

Despite the increased interest in economic evaluations, there are difficulties in applying the results of such studies in practice. Therefore, the "Research Agenda for Health Economic Evaluation" (RAHEE) project was initiated, which aimed to improve the use of health economic evidence in practice for the 10 highest burden conditions in the European Union (including low back pain [LBP] and neck pain [NP]). This was done by undertaking literature mapping and convening an Expert Panel meeting, during which the literature mapping results were discussed and evidence gaps and methodological constraints were identified. The current paper is a part of the RAHEE project and aimed to identify economic evidence gaps and methodological constraints in the LBP and NP literature, in particular. The literature mapping revealed that economic evidence was unavailable for various commonly used LBP and NP treatments (e.g., injections, traction, and discography). Even if economic evidence was available, many treatments were only evaluated in a single study or studies for the same intervention were highly heterogeneous in terms of their patient population, control condition, follow-up duration, setting, and/or economic perspective. Up until now, this has prevented economic evaluation results from being statistically pooled in the LBP and NP literature, and strong conclusions about the cost-effectiveness of LBP and NP treatments can therefore not be made. The Expert Panel identified the need for further high-quality economic evaluations, especially on surgery versus conservative care and competing treatment options for chronic LBP. Handling of uncertainty and reporting quality were considered the most important methodological challenges.

Behavioural treatment for chronic low-back pain.

BACKGROUND: Behavioural treatment, commonly used in the treatment of chronic low-back pain (CLBP), is primarily focused at reducing disability through the modification of environmental contingencies and cognitive processes. In general, three behavioural treatment approaches are distinguished: operant, cognitive and respondent. OBJECTIVES: To determine if behavioural therapy is more effective than reference treatments for CLBP, and which type of behavioural treatment is most effective. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycLIT databases up to October 2003. References of identified randomised trials and relevant systematic reviews were screened. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only randomised trials on behavioural treatment for non-specific CLBP were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality and extracted the data. The magnitude of effect was assessed by computing a pooled effect size for post-treatment and long-term results for each comparison, for each domain (i.e., behavioural outcomes, overall improvement, back pain specific and generic functional status, return to work, and pain intensity) using the random effects model. MAIN RESULTS: Seven studies (33%) were considered high quality. Comparing behavioural treatment to waiting list control (WLC) revealed strong evidence (4 trials, 134 people) in favour of a combined respondent-cognitive therapy for a medium positive effect on pain, and moderate evidence (2 trials, 39 people) in favour of progressive relaxation for a large positive effect on pain and behavioural outcomes (short-term only). When comparing operant treatment to WLC no significant differences could be detected on general functional status (strong evidence: 2 trials, 87 people) or on behavioural outcomes (moderate evidence; 3 trials, 153 people) (short-term only). There is limited evidence (1 trial, 98 people) that a graded activity program in an industrial setting is more effective than usual care for early return to work and reduced long-term sick leave. There is limited evidence (1 trail, 39 people) that there are no differences between behavioural treatment and exercises. Finally, there is moderate evidence (6 trials, 210 people) that there are no significant differences in short-term and long-term effectiveness when behavioural components are added to usual treatment programs for CLBP (i.e. physiotherapy, back education) on pain, generic functional status and behavioural outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Combined respondent-cognitive therapy and progressive relaxation therapy are more effective than WLC on short-term pain relief. However, it is unknown whether these results sustain in the long term. No significant differences could be detected between behavioural treatment and exercise therapy. Whether clinicians should refer patients with CLBP to behavioural treatment programs or to active conservative treatment cannot be concluded from this review.

Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low back pain: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the long term effects of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for patients with chronic low back pain. DESIGN: Systematic review and random effects meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. DATA SOURCES: Electronic searches of Cochrane Back Review Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases up to February 2014, supplemented by hand searching of reference lists and forward citation tracking of included trials. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials published in full; participants with low back pain for more than three months; multidisciplinary rehabilitation involved a physical component and one or both of a psychological component or a social or work targeted component; multidisciplinary rehabilitation was delivered by healthcare professionals from at least two different professional backgrounds; multidisciplinary rehabilitation was compared with a non- multidisciplinary intervention. RESULTS: Forty one trials included a total of 6858 participants with a mean duration of pain of more than one year who often had failed previous treatment. Sixteen trials provided moderate quality evidence that multidisciplinary rehabilitation decreased pain (standardised mean difference 0.21, 95% confidence interval 0.04 to 0.37; equivalent to 0.5 points in a 10 point pain scale) and disability (0.23, 0.06 to 0.40; equivalent to 1.5 points in a 24 point Roland-Morris index) compared with usual care. Nineteen trials provided low quality evidence that multidisciplinary rehabilitation decreased pain (standardised mean difference 0.51, -0.01 to 1.04) and disability (0.68, 0.16 to 1.19) compared with physical treatments, but significant statistical heterogeneity across trials was present. Eight trials provided moderate quality evidence that multidisciplinary rehabilitation improves the odds of being at work one year after intervention (odds ratio 1.87, 95% confidence interval 1.39 to 2.53) compared with physical treatments. Seven trials provided moderate quality evidence that multidisciplinary rehabilitation does not improve the odds of being at work (odds ratio 1.04, 0.73 to 1.47) compared with usual care. Two trials that compared multidisciplinary rehabilitation with surgery found little difference in outcomes and an increased risk of adverse events with surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation interventions were more effective than usual care (moderate quality evidence) and physical treatments (low quality evidence) in decreasing pain and disability in people with chronic low back pain. For work outcomes, multidisciplinary rehabilitation seems to be more effective than physical treatment but not more effective than usual care.

Smoking cessation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Smoking cessation is the most important treatment for smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but little is known about the effectiveness of different smoking cessation interventions for this particular group of patients. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in people with COPD. SEARCH STRATEGY: Electronic searches were undertaken on MEDLINE (from 1966 to March 2002), EMBASE (from 1989 to March 2002) and Psyclit (from 1971 to March 2002), and CENTRAL (Issue 1, 2002). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials in which smoking cessation was assessed in participants with confirmed COPD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted the data and performed the methodological quality assessment independently for each study, with disagreements resolved by consensus. High-quality was defined, based on pre-set criteria according to the DelphiList. MAIN RESULTS: Five studies were included in this systematic review, two of which were of high-quality. The high-quality studies show the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions combined with pharmacological intervention compared to no treatment: psychosocial interventions combined with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and a bronchodilator versus no treatment at a 5 year follow-up (RD = 0.16, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.18), (RR = 4.0, 95% CI 3.25 to 4.93), psychosocial interventions combined with NRT and placebo versus no treatment at a 5 year follow-up (RD = 0.17, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.19), (RR = 4.19, 95% CI 3.41 to 5.15). Furthermore the results show the effectiveness of various combinations of psychosocial and pharmacological interventions at a 6 months follow-up (RD = 0.07, 95% CI 0.0 to 0.13), (RR = 1.74, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.0). Unfortunately, none of the included studies compared psychosocial interventions with no treatment. Therefore we found no evidence with regard to the effectiveness of these interventions. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Based on this systematic review, the authors found evidence that a combination of psychosocial interventions and pharmacological interventions is superior to no treatment or to psychosocial interventions alone. Furthermore we conclude that there is no clear or convincing evidence for the effectiveness of any psychosocial intervention for patients with COPD due to lack of a sufficient number of high-quality studies.

Health care provider's attitudes and beliefs towards chronic low back pain: the development of a questionnaire.

Attitudes and beliefs, or the treatment orientation, of health care providers appear to be important in the management of non-specific chronic low back pain (CLBP). The aims of the current study were two-fold: First of all, the physiotherapists' opinion towards various aspects of the management of CLBP was surveyed. Secondly, in a principal factor analysis, it was investigated whether underlying dimensions could be identified in order to develop the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS_PT). In total, 421 physiotherapists (response rate 62.3%) participated in this study. The results suggested that the majority of physiotherapists hold the opinion that CLBP is not a dangerous condition, that sport should not be discouraged and that patients should not refrain from all physical activity. Moreover physiotherapists seem to hold the opinion that the way patients view their pain influences the progress of symptoms. Finally, physiotherapists seem to hold the opinion that therapy can completely alleviate the functional symptoms and that therapy may have been successful even if pain remains. The principal factor analysis (PAF) yielded an interpretable 2-factor model. Based on highest loading items, factor 1 was labelled 'biomedical orientation', whereas factor 2 was labelled 'behavioural orientation'. The internal consistency (Cronbach's Alpha) of factor 1 was 0.84 and for factor 2, 0.54 explaining 25.2% and 8.2%, respectively, of the total variance. Assessment of the effect of the physiotherapists' characteristics on scores on the different scales was encouraging as results pointed in the directions one would expect. Physiotherapists who attended biopsychosocial education courses had statistically significantly higher scores on the 'behavioural orientation' factor and vice versa. Biomedical specialists scored statistically significantly higher on the 'biomedical orientation' factor. Furthermore, the findings suggested that the PABS_PT discriminates between physiotherapists with a 'behavioural orientation' vs those with a 'biomedical orientation'. To examine the influence of these different treatment orientations with regard to CLBP on patient outcome is a challenge for the near future.

The psychometric properties of the PABS-PT in neck pain patients: a validation study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the reliability and validity of the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS-PT) in neck pain patients. Three research goals were formulated. (1): to reexamine the factor structure of the PABS-PT, (2) to assess the test-retest reliability of the PABS-PT and (3) to determine the construct validity of the biomedical factor of the PABS-PT. METHODS: Manual therapists (n = 272) included in this study participated in an educational upgrade program for a professional masters' degree in the Netherlands and completed the Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale and the PABS-PT. Principal Axis Factor analysis was performed and correlation coefficients were calculated. In addition, Bland and Altman plots and the smallest real difference were determined. RESULTS: We performed factor analysis on 182 questionnaires and test-rest calculations on 73 questionnaires. The principal factor analysis confirmed the existing interpretable 2-factor model of a 'biomedical treatment orientation' and a 'behavioral treatment orientation'. Test-retest reliability was 'moderate' to 'good' and construct validity for the biomedical factor was 'moderate' to 'substantial'. CONCLUSION: The PABS-PT shows a consistent factor structure and good test-retest reliability and construct validity. More research is needed to gain further insight in the interplay between implicit and explicit attitudes and the dynamics of the PABS-PT score across different body parts.