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.

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.

Convergent validity of clinical tests which are hypothesized to be associated with physical functioning in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Up until now, assessment of physical functioning in patients with low back pain is mostly completed with the use of patient reported outcome measurements (PROMs). There are however limitations to the use of these measurements such as inaccuracies due to recall bias, social desirability bias and errors in self-observation. A recent review indicated seven clinical tests as having good test retest reliability. These tests can now be further investigated for their validity. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the convergent validity of seven clinical tests (extensor endurance, flexor endurance, 5 minute walking, 50 foot walking, shuttle walk, sit to stand and the loaded forward reach test) in patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain (CLBP). METHODS: Patients filled in a series of PROMs and performed all included clinical tests during a specific test moment. Convergent validity was firstly investigated by assessing Pearson correlations between the seven included clinical tests and secondly by assessing the correlations between the predefined PROMs and the clinical tests. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were included in this study representing a power of 84%. The best overall evidence for convergent validity could be identified for the extensor endurance, sit to stand and the loaded forward reach test. However, when all study results were combined, evidence for convergent validity was found for all included clinical tests except for the shuttle walk test. CONCLUSION: The current study was able to provide evidence that multimethod and multidimensional approaches should be used as a more comprehensive assessment of physical function in patients with nonspecific CLBP.

Illness Perceptions Explain the Variance in Functional Disability, but Not Habitual Physical Activity, in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: Although the importance of psychosocial factors has been highlighted in many studies in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP), there is a lack of research examining the role of illness perceptions in explaining functional disability and physical activity in patients with CLBP. AIM: The aim of the study was to explore the value of illness perceptions in explaining functional disability and physical activity in patients with CLBP. METHODS: Eighty-four participants with CLBP (of > 3 months' duration) completed a battery of questionnaires investigating psychosocial factors (Pain Catastrophizing Scale [PCS], Illness Perceptions Questionnaire Revised [IPQ-R], and 36-Item Short Form mental health scale [SF-36_MH]) and perceived pain intensity (visual analog scale [VAS]), as well as the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Baecke questionnaire. The latter 2 were entered separately as dependent variables in a regression analysis. RESULTS: The combined variables (VAS, PCS, SF-36_MH, IPQ-R) accounted for 62% of the variance in functional disability (ODI). Adding the results of the IPQ-R to the scores of the other 3 variables (VAS, PCS, SF-36_MH) significantly increased the explained variance of ODI scores in CLBP patients, yielding 18% additional information (P < 0.01). Only 5% of the variance in the Baecke questionnaire was explained by combining the 4 variables. None of the single variables alone made a significant contribution to R². CONCLUSIONS: Illness perceptions are an important factor for explaining functional disability, but not for explaining habitual physical activity in CLBP patients.

History taking by physiotherapists with low back pain patients: are illness perceptions addressed properly?

PURPOSE: Despite the increasing evidence that illness perceptions should be addressed in patients, there is a lack of studies evaluating whether physiotherapists question illness perceptions. This study, using a mixed-methods design, investigates the integration of illness perceptions during the first consultation of physiotherapists treating patients with low back pain (LBP). METHODS: Thirty-four physiotherapists performed usual history taking in a patient with non-specific LBP. The interview was audiotaped and illness perceptions were indexed using an observational instrument, based on the domains of Leventhal's Common Sense Model. Patients were also asked to fill in the Illness Perception Questionnaire-Revised for LBP. RESULTS: Physiotherapists assessed the illness identity, also perceptions regarding the (physical) cause and controllability of LBP were evaluated. Illness perceptions, such as timeline, consequences, coherence and emotional representation, were poorly assessed. Results of the questionnaire reveal that LBP-patients report overuse, workload and bad posture as primary cause. Patients held positive beliefs about the controllability and have high illness coherence. CONCLUSION: Belgian physiotherapists mainly question bio-medically oriented illness perceptions, e.g. physical symptoms and causes, but do not sufficiently address psychosocially oriented illness perceptions as recommended in LBP guidelines. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: Belgian physiotherapists mainly question biomedical oriented illness perceptions (illness identity, provoking factors and treatment control) in patients with low back pain (LBP) during the history taking (i.e. the first consultation). From a bio-psycho-social view psychosocially oriented illness perceptions should be incorporated in the daily routine of physiotherapist's to comply with the bio-psycho-social treatment guidelines for LBP. Continuing education is mandatory in order to improve physiotherapists' knowledge regarding the use of all dimensions of illness perceptions in the assessment of patients with LBP.

Clinimetric properties of illness perception questionnaire revised (IPQ-R) and brief illness perception questionnaire (Brief IPQ) in patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review.

Several questionnaires are available to evaluate illness perceptions in patients, such as the illness perception questionnaire revised (IPQ-R) and the brief version (Brief IPQ). This study aims to systematically review the literature concerning the clinimetric properties of the IPQ-R and the Brief IPQ in patients with musculoskeletal pain. The electronic databases Web of Sciences and PubMed were searched. Studies were included when the clinimetric properties of the IPQ-R or Brief IPQ were assessed in adults with musculoskeletal pain. Methodological quality was determined using the COSMIN checklist. Eight articles were included and evaluated. The methodological quality was good for 3 COSMIN boxes, fair for 11 and poor for 3 boxes. None of the articles obtained an excellent methodological score. The results of this review suggest that the IPQ-R is a reliable questionnaire, except for illness coherence. Internal consistency is good, except for the causal domain. The IPQ-R has good construct validity, but the factor structure is unstable. Hence, the IPQ-R appears to be a useful instrument for assessing illness perceptions, but care must be taken when generalizing the results of adapted versions of the questionnaires. The Brief IPQ shows moderate overall test-retest reliability. No articles examining the validity of the Brief IPQ were found. Further research should therefore focus on the content and criterion validity of the IPQ-R and the clinimetric properties of the Brief IPQ.