A Cognitive Occupation-Based programme for people with MS: acceptability, feasibility, and experiences of people with multiple sclerosis.

PURPOSE: COB-MS is an eight-session, Cognitive Occupation-Based programme for people with both MS and cognitive difficulty - designed to enhance cognition and daily functioning, through a combination of goal-setting, cognitive strategy engagement, group activities, home-practice activities and one-on-one sessions. This research aims to investigate the acceptability of COB-MS from the perspective of people living with MS, as well as the occupational therapists who facilitated the programme. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two content analyses were conducted on interview data from (n = 11) COB-MS participants and (n = 8) COB-MS facilitators. Thematic analysis was also conducted on the participant interview data. RESULTS: Through a, primary, content analysis, participants reported that the COB-MS provided both a positive experience and quality resources. Qualitative improvement and utilisation of their learning beyond completion of the intervention were also identified. Four themes were identified via, secondary, thematic analysis: (1) Group interaction within COB-MS was vital; (2) Online COB-MS had positive and negative effects on participation; (3) COB-MS as a provider of clarity; and (4) Using learned strategies after the completion of COB-MS. Recommendations for future administration are provided. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest COB-MS acceptability, as well as appropriateness and feasibility, indicative of progression to a definitive trial in future research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: ISRCTN11462710. Registered on 9 September 2019.

Cognitive difficulties associated with multiple sclerosis (MS) impact on daily life activities and are considered invisible MS symptoms. This invisibility and the lack of acknowledgement of such symptoms often adds to the distress experienced by people with MS.Occupational therapists are well-placed to address the daily-life impacts of cognitive difficulties in MS.The COB-MS is an occupation-focused intervention that aims to enhance daily function.The intervention was found to be well-accepted well by people with MS and occupational therapists and can feasibly be delivered in clinical practice.

An Evaluative Review of Barriers to Critical Thinking in Educational and Real-World Settings.

Though a wide array of definitions and conceptualisations of critical thinking have been offered in the past, further elaboration on some concepts is required, particularly with respect to various factors that may impede an individual's application of critical thinking, such as in the case of reflective judgment. These barriers include varying levels of epistemological engagement or understanding, issues pertaining to heuristic-based thinking and intuitive judgment, as well as emotional and biased thinking. The aim of this review is to discuss such barriers and evaluate their impact on critical thinking in light of perspectives from research in an effort to reinforce the 'completeness' of extant critical thinking frameworks and to enhance the potential benefits of implementation in real-world settings. Recommendations and implications for overcoming such barriers are also discussed and evaluated.

Evaluating the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a Cognitive Occupation-Based programme for people with Multiple Sclerosis (COB-MS): an update to the protocol for a feasibility cluster-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive difficulties experienced by people with multiple sclerosis (MS) impact on quality of life and daily functioning, from childcare and work to social and self-care activities. The Cognitive Occupation-Based programme for people with MS (COB-MS) was developed as a holistic, individualised cognitive rehabilitation intervention to address the wide-ranging symptoms and functional difficulties that present in MS, including the ability to maintain employment, social activities, home management and self-care. The aim of the research is to evaluate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of COB-MS for people with MS. METHODS: Due to the impacts of COVID-19, trial activities that were planned for in-person delivery were completed remotely. One hundred and twenty people with MS will be assigned to participate in either the COB-MS programme or a treatment-as-usual, wait-list control group as part of this single-blind, cluster-randomised controlled feasibility and preliminary efficacy trial of the COB-MS programme. The COB-MS group will participate in an eight-session occupational-based cognitive rehabilitation programme over 9 weeks. The COB-MS intervention was planned for in-person delivery but was delivered online by occupational therapists to small groups of people with MS. The primary outcome measure is the Goal Attainment Scaling at 12 weeks. Participants will be assessed pre-intervention, post-intervention, 12 weeks post-intervention and 6 months post-intervention. Qualitative evaluations of participants' perspectives will also be examined as part of the feasibility study. Data, due to be collected in-person, was collected online or by post. The original study design, including the statistical analysis plan, remains unchanged despite the shift to a remote trial conduct. DISCUSSION: Results will provide recommendations for a future definitive trial of COB-MS, with respect to both feasibility and preliminary, clinical efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN ISRCTN11462710 . Registered on 9 September 2019 and updated on 23 September 2020 to account for changes outlined here.

Remote administration of BICAMS measures and the Trail-Making Test to assess cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis.

Reliable remote cognitive testing could provide a safer assessment of cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis (MS) during the COVID-19 pandemic and thereafter. Here we aimed to investigate the reliability and feasibility of administering Brief International Cognitive Assessment for MS (BICAMS) and the Trail-Making Test (TMT) to people with MS online. Between-group differences on BICAMS and the TMT were examined in a sample of 68 participants. Group 1 (N = 34) was tested in-person pre-pandemic. Group 2 was tested remotely. Within-group differences for in-person and virtual administrations were examined for Group 1. No significant differences between virtual and in-person administrations of the CVLT-II and SDMT were detected. BVMT-R scores were significantly higher for virtual administrations (M = 20.59, SD = 6.65) compared to in-person administrations (M = 16.35, SD = 6.05), possibly indicating inter-rater differences. Strong positive correlations were found for in-person and virtual scores within Group 1 on the CVLT-II (r = .84), SDMT (r = .85), TMT-A (r = .88), TMT-B (r = .76) and BVMT-R (r = .72). No significant differences between in-person and remote administrations of CVLT-II and SDMT in people living with MS were detected. Recommendations for future studies employing the TMT and BVMT-R online are provided.

A qualitative investigation of reasoning behind decisions to decline participation in a research intervention: A study-within-a-trial.

The current study-within-a-trial explored individuals' decisions to decline participation in research trialling a chronic illness-focused therapy (i.e. multiple sclerosis). Four themes were identified from seven semi-structured interviews with participation decliners and were confirmed by the host trial's Patient & Public Involvement (PPI) panel: acknowledgement of the value of research; 'fit' of the study; misinterpretation of participant information; and 'ignorance is bliss' - discussed in light of theory and research. This study-within-a-trial extends research on trial recruitment and participation decline; while also suggesting that PPI can be utilised in both a practical and impactful manner.

Assessment and Management of Cognitive and Psychosocial Difficulties for People with Multiple Sclerosis in Ireland: A National Survey of Clinical Practice.

Background: A recent survey of 109 healthcare professionals explored how UK healthcare professionals typically assess and treat multiple sclerosis (MS)-related cognitive impairment. Little is currently known about what constitutes usual care for cognitive impairment and psychosocial care for people with MS in Ireland. Aim: The aim of the current research was to survey healthcare professionals (HCPs) who work with people with MS, to understand current assessment and management of cognition and psychosocial care in people with MS in the Republic of Ireland. Methods: A cross-sectional survey design was used. Data were collected online through Microsoft forms and through postal responses. The original UK questionnaire was adapted, piloted, and distributed to Irish HCPs. Participants were qualified HCPs who work clinically with people with MS in the Republic of Ireland. Results: Ninety-eight HCPs completed the survey. Only 34% of those surveyed reported routine screening of cognition for people with MS within their services; approximately, 36% HCPs reported that they did not provide information or services in relation to cognition to people with MS and 39% reported not referring elsewhere when cognitive difficulties were suspected. Out of the 98 HCPs, 47% reported assessing mood difficulties as part of their services, with 14% unsure. In total, 70% of participants reported onward referral took place if mood difficulties were identified. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment was the most commonly administrated cognitive assessment. Cognitive intervention choices were found to be guided by clinical judgement in 75.5% of cases. Discussion. Despite the high importance placed on cognitive and psychosocial care, there is very little consistency in treatment and assessment across services for people with MS in Ireland.

Comparing the effects of a patient-designed-and-informed participant information leaflet in comparison with a standard, researcher-designed information leaflet on recruitment, retention and understanding: A study-within-a-trial.

Background and aim: The process of trial recruitment is vital, given its impact on resources, statistical power and the validity of findings. A participant information leaflet (PIL) is often the initial and primary source of information engaged by potential participants during recruitment. Research suggests that a variety of manipulations to a PIL can be made during its development to enhance understanding, readability and accessibility. In light of this, PIL-design led by Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) may also yield positive effects in this respect, as well as consent and retention. This study-within-a-trial (SWAT) compared the effects of a PPI-developed PIL with a standard, researcher-developed PIL on rates of consent, retention, decision certainty, understanding, readability, accessibility, likeability and decision to consent. Method: This SWAT used a double-blind, two-armed randomised design. The SWAT was conducted within a host trial of cognitive rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis. Results: A total of 234 people expressed interest in the trial, of which 94 were retained at 6-month follow up. Results revealed no effects on levels of consent and retention between the two PIL groups. Conclusions: These null effects provide interesting points of discussion and important implications for not only future research on PILs, but also for future research that involves recruitment to health-related interventions.

Exploring the impact of ineligibility on individuals expressing interest in a trial aimed at improving daily functioning regarding perceptions of self, research and likelihood of future participation.

BACKGROUND: Eligibility guidelines in research trials are necessary to minimise confounds and reduce bias in the interpretation of potential treatment effects. There is limited extant research investigating how being deemed ineligible for such trials might impact patients' perceptions of themselves and of research. Better understanding of the impact of patient ineligibility could enhance design and implementation of future research studies. METHODS: Eight semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted to explore the impact of ineligibility on self-perceptions; perceptions regarding the nature of research; and the likelihood of expressing interest in future research. Data were collected and analysed thematically through inductive, interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA). RESULTS: Five themes emerged regarding the experience of being deemed ineligible: (1) Being deemed ineligible is emotion and reaction evoking; (2) 'Doing your bit': Helping others and increasing the value of research; (3) Communication of ineligibility; (4) Appreciation for those who express interest; and (5) Subsequent perceptions and attitudes towards research. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that being deemed ineligible can elicit negative emotional outcomes but is not likely to change perceptions of or attitudes towards research, possibly due to a desire to help similar others. Ineligibility can impact future participation in some cases, thus reducing the recruitment pool for subsequent research studies. Recommendations are provided to help minimise this risk. Advising of ineligibility in a personal way is recommended: with enhanced clarity regarding the reasoning behind the decision; providing opportunities to ask questions; and ensuring that appreciation for the patient's time and interest are communicated.

Twelve months into a feasibility trial: reflections on three experiences of public and patient involvement in research.

In this Open Letter we present reflections from three different perspectives on the integration of public and patient involvement (PPI) in a research trial. We reflect on the experience of having a patient employed as a contract researcher, with no prior research experience, on a feasibility trial of cognitive rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis. This Open Letter is written by the PPI research team member with reflections from a researcher on the trial and the principle investigator. We will discuss some of the changes made and the impacts that have been resulted from of PPI input into the trial. We focus on PPI involvement in participant recruitment, the development of trial material, integration of PPI along the research cycle, and collaboration. We hope that this Open Letter will encourage principle investigators and groups to include PPI members as part of the research team and help patients and members of the public understand what the experience of PPI members is like.

An examination of the effects of a patient-designed-and-informed participant information sheet in comparison with a standard, researcher-designed information sheet on recruitment, retention and understanding: Protocol for a study-within-a-trial.

Background: This protocol describes a double-blind, randomised non-inferiority study-within-a-trial (SWAT), comparing the effects of a patient-designed-and-informed participant information sheet with a standard, researcher-designed participant information sheet on recruitment, retention, decision certainty, participant information sheet understanding and likeability. The SWAT is part of a larger trial that aims to evaluate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a cognitive occupation-based programme for people with MS (COB-MS) on cognitive and daily functioning for people with multiple sclerosis. Methods: During the study, 120 people with multiple sclerosis will be randomly allocated to one of the two groups, where they will either receive a standard participant information sheet or a patient-designed participant information sheet. Recruitment and retention will be analysed, as well as decision certainty, likability and understanding. Discussion: Results will provide recommendations for recruitment, consent and retention for future trials, as well as shed some light on the factors influencing the understanding and likeability of a trial's participant information sheet. Recommendations will also be made regarding patient and public involvement in developing and/or aiding the development of participant information sheets.  Registration: SWAT: Northern Ireland Hub for Trials Methodology Research SWAT Repository Store ( SWAT105). COB-MS trial: ISRCTN11462710.

Evaluating the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a Cognitive Occupation-Based programme for people with Multiple Sclerosis (COB-MS): protocol for a feasibility cluster-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive difficulties experienced by people with multiple sclerosis (MS) impact their quality of life and daily functioning, from childcare and work, to social and self-care activities. Despite the high prevalence of cognitive difficulties seen in MS, there is a lack of developed programmes that target cognition, while also supporting patients by helping them to function well in everyday life. The Cognitive Occupation-Based programme for people with MS (COB-MS) was developed as a holistic, individualised cognitive rehabilitation intervention. It addresses the wide-ranging symptoms and functional difficulties that present in MS, including the ability to maintain employment, social activities, home management and self-care. The aim of the current research is to evaluate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of COB-MS for people with MS. The focus is on feasibility outcomes as well as functioning associated with cognitive difficulty and secondary outcomes related to cognition, fatigue and quality of life. METHODS: One hundred and twenty people with MS will be assigned to participate in either the COB-MS programme or a treatment as usual, wait-list control group as part of this single-blind, cluster-randomised controlled feasibility and preliminary efficacy trial of the COB-MS programme. The COB-MS group will participate in an eight-session occupational-based cognitive rehabilitation programme over 9 weeks. The primary outcome measure is the goal attainment scaling at 12 weeks. Participants will be assessed pre-intervention, post-intervention and at 12 weeks post-intervention and 6 months post-intervention. Qualitative evaluations of participants' perspectives will also be examined as part of the feasibility study. DISCUSSION: Results will provide recommendations for a future definitive trial of COB-MS, with respect to both feasibility and preliminary, clinical efficacy. In the event that results indicate efficacy, study findings will suggest that COB-MS requires consideration as a means of enhancing cognitive and daily functioning in people living with MS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: ISRCTN11462710. Registered on 9 September 2019.

Effects of Biopsychosocial Education on the Clinical Judgments of Medical Students and GP Trainees Regarding Future Risk of Disability in Chronic Lower Back Pain: A Randomized Control Trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic lower back pain (CLBP) is a major health care burden and often results in workplace absenteeism. It is a priority for appropriate management of CLBP to get individuals back to work as early as possible. Interventions informed by the flags approach, which integrates cognitive and behavioral approaches via identification of biopsychosocial barriers to recovery, have resulted in reduced pain-related work absences and increased return to work for individuals with CLBP. However, research indicates that physicians' adherence to biopsychosocial guidelines is low. OBJECTIVE: The current study examined the effects of a flags approach-based educational intervention on clinical judgments of medical students and general practitioner (GP) trainees regarding the risk of future disability of CLBP patients. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial (trial registration number: ISRCTN53670726). SETTING: University classroom. SUBJECTS: Medical students and GP trainees. METHODS: Using 40 fictional CLBP cases, differences in clinical judgment accuracy, weighting, and speed (experimental N = 32) were examined pre- and postintervention, as were flags approach knowledge, pain attitudes and beliefs, and empathy, in comparison with a no-intervention control group (control N = 31). RESULTS: Results revealed positive effects of the educational intervention on flags approach knowledge, pain-related attitudes and beliefs, and judgment weighting of psychologically based cues; results are discussed in light of existing theory and research. CONCLUSIONS: Short flags approach-based educational video interventions on clinical judgment-making regarding the risk of future disability of CLBP patients may provide opportunities to gain biopsychosocial knowledge, overcome associated attitude barriers, and facilitate development of clinical judgment-making more aligned with psychological cues.

Comparative efficacy of exercise and anti-hypertensive pharmacological interventions in reducing blood pressure in people with hypertension: A network meta-analysis.

AIMS: This analysis aims to estimate the comparative efficacy of anti-hypertensive medications and exercise interventions on systolic and diastolic blood pressure reduction in people with hypertension. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted focusing on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise interventions and first-line anti-hypertensives where blood pressure reduction was the primary outcome in those with hypertension. Network meta-analyses were conducted to generate estimates of comparative efficacy. RESULTS: We identified 93 RCTs (N = 32,404, mean age in RCTs: 39-70 years) which compared placebo or usual care with first-line antihypertensives including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers and thiazide-like diuretics and exercise interventions including aerobic training and dynamic resistance training. Of these, there were 81 (87%) trials related to medications (n = 31,347, 97%) and 12 (13%) trials related to exercise (n = 1057, 3%). The point estimates suggested that antihypertensive medications were more effective than exercise but there was insufficient evidence to suggest that first-line medications significantly reduced blood pressure to a greater extent than did the exercise interventions. Of the first-line treatments, angiotensin receptor blockers and calcium channel blockers had the highest treatment ranking, while exercise had the second lowest treatment ranking, followed by control conditions. CONCLUSION: The current evidence base with a bias towards medication research may partly explain the circumspection around the efficacy of exercise in guidelines and practice. Clinicians may justifiably consider exercise for low risk hypertension patients who confirm a preference for such an approach.

An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Modalities Used to Deliver Electronic Health Interventions for Chronic Pain: Systematic Review With Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Electronic health (eHealth) is the use of information and communication technology in the context of health care and health research. Recently, there has been a rise in the number of eHealth modalities and the frequency with which they are used to deliver technology-assisted self-management interventions for people living with chronic pain. However, there has been little or no research directly comparing these eHealth modalities. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review with a network meta-analysis (NMA) is to compare the effectiveness of eHealth modalities in the context of chronic pain. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (N>20 per arm) that investigated interventions for adults with chronic pain, delivered via an eHealth modality, were included. Included studies were categorized into their primary node of delivery. Data were extracted on the primary outcome, pain interference, and secondary outcomes, pain severity, psychological distress, and health-related quality of life. Pairwise meta-analyses were undertaken where possible, and an NMA was conducted to generate indirect comparisons and rankings of modalities for reducing pain interference. RESULTS: The search returned 18,470 studies with 18,349 being excluded (duplicates=2310; title and abstract=16,039). Of the remaining papers, 30 studies with 5394 randomized participants were included in the review. Rankings tentatively indicated that modern eHealth modalities are the most effective, with a 43% chance that mobile apps delivered the most effective interventions, followed by a 34% chance that interventions delivered via virtual reality were the most effective. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review with an NMA generated comparisons between eHealth modalities previously not compared to determine which delivered the most effective interventions for the reduction of pain interference in chronic pain patients. There are limitations with this review, in particular, the underrepresented nature of some eHealth modalities included in the analysis. However, in the event that the review is regularly updated, a clear ranking of eHealth modalities for the reduction of pain interference will emerge.

Investigating the effectiveness of an online acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) intervention versus a waiting list control condition on pain interference and quality of life in adults with chronic pain and multimorbidity: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Multimorbidity refers to the presence of two or more chronic health conditions within one person, where no one condition is primary. Research suggests that multimorbidity is highly correlated with chronic pain, which is pain lasting longer than 3 months. Psychotherapeutic interventions for people living with chronic illness have resulted in reduced symptom reporting and improved psychological well-being. There is a dearth of research, however, using online psychotherapy for people living with multimorbidity where chronic pain is a central condition. This study will compare the effectiveness of an online acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) intervention with a waiting list control condition in terms of improving health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and reducing levels of pain interference in people with chronic pain and at least one other condition. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 192 adult participants with non-malignant pain that persists for at least 3 months and at least one other medically diagnosed condition will be randomised to one of two study conditions. The experimental group will undergo an eight-session internet-delivered ACT programme over an 8-week period. A waiting list group will be offered the ACT intervention after the 3-month follow-up period. HRQoL and pain interference will act as the primary outcomes. Data will be analysed using a linear mixed model and adjusted to account for demographic and clinical variables as necessary. A Study Within a Trial will be incorporated to examine the effect on recruitment and retention of showing participants an animated educational video. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the Research Ethics Committee of the National University of Ireland, Galway. Dissemination of results will be via peer reviewed journal articles and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN22343024.

Judgement analysis of case severity and future risk of disability regarding chronic low back pain by general practitioners in Ireland.

Chronic low back pain is a major healthcare burden that has wide ranging effects on the individual, their family, society and the workplace. However, appropriate management and treatment is often difficult, as a majority of cases are non-specific in terms of underlying pathology. As a result, there are extensive differences in both individual patient preferences for treatment and treatment decisions amongst general practitioners. The current study examined the clinical judgements of GPs in Ireland, regarding fictional patients' case severity and future risk of disability, through judgement analysis. Judgement analysis (JA) is an idiographic regression modelling technique that has been utilised in extant healthcare research for the purpose of allocating weighting to judgement criteria, or cues, observed by professionals in their clinical decision-making. The primary aim of the study was to model two critical information utilisation tasks performed by GPs with regard to CLBP-in combining information cues to form a judgement about current case severity and a judgement about the same patient's risk of future disability. It was hypothesised that the judgement weighting would differ across the two judgements and that judgements regarding future risk of disability would be less consistent among GPs than judgements about case severity. Results from the regression-based judgement analysis and subsequent follow-up statistical analysis provided support for both study hypotheses. Study findings are discussed in light of theory and research on judgement, clinical decision-making and chronic low back pain.

Factors Influencing the Application of a Biopsychosocial Perspective in Clinical Judgement of Chronic Pain: Interactive Management with Medical Students.

BACKGROUND: Though there is wide support for the application of biopsychosocial perspectives in clinical judgement of chronic pain cases, such perspectives are often overlooked due to either inadequate training or attitudes favoring a biomedical approach. Recent research has indicated that despite such explanations, both established general practitioners (GP) and medical students account for some psychosocial factors when making clinical judgements regarding chronic pain cases, but report not being likely to apply these in real-world, clinical settings due to numerous factors, including available time with patients. Thus, it is evident that a greater understanding of clinical judgement-making processes and the factors that affect application of these processes is required, particularly regarding chronic pain. OBJECTIVES: The aims of the current study were to investigate medical students' conceptualizations of the factors that influence application of a biopsychosocial approach to clinical judgement-making in cases of chronic pain using interactive management (IM), model the relationships among these factors, and make recommendations to chronic pain treatment policy in light of the findings. STUDY DESIGN: The current study used IM to identify and model factors that influence the application of a biopsychosocial approach to clinical judgement-making in cases of chronic pain, based on medical students' conceptualizations of these factors. SETTING: Two university classrooms. METHODS: IM is a systems thinking and action mapping strategy used to aid groups in developing outcomes regarding complex issues, through integrating contributions from individuals with diverse views, backgrounds, and perspectives. IM commonly utilizes the nominal group technique and interpretive structural modeling, which in this context were employed to help medical students identify, clarify, and model influences on the application of biopsychosocial perspectives in treating chronic pain patients. RESULTS: Results of IM group work revealed 7 core biopsychosocial approach application categories: GP attitudes, cost, GP knowledge, time, patient-doctor relationship, biomedical factors. and patient perception. GP attitudes was the most critical driver of all other competencies in the system, with cost and GP knowledge revealed as secondary drivers. LIMITATIONS: Potential differences in level of prior biopsychosocial perspective knowledge across participants and a potentially small sample size (though consistent with past research and appropriate for an exploratory study of this nature - for purposes of achieving the depth and richness of the deliberation and qualitative insights revealed by participants using the IM methodology). CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study may be used to both recommend further research on the identified factors influencing application of biopsychosocial perspectives in treatment of chronic pain and support amendment to extant health care policy, particularly with respect to cost, GP attitudes, and knowledge. Though this research claims neither that the influences identified are the only influences on biopsychosocial application, nor the order of their importance, the research does contribute to an on-going effort to better understand the factors that influence doctors in their treatment of chronic pain.Key words: Chronic pain, biopsychosocial, medical education, clinical judgement, interactive management, pain management.

Protocol for a systematic review with network meta-analysis of the modalities used to deliver eHealth interventions for chronic pain.

BACKGROUND: As eHealth interventions prove both efficacious and practical, and as they arguably overcome certain barriers encountered by traditional face-to-face treatment for chronic pain, their number has increased dramatically in recent times. However, there is a dearth of research that focuses on evaluating and comparing the different types of technology-assisted interventions. This is a protocol for a systematic review that aims to evaluate the eHealth modalities in the context of psychological and non-psychological (other than non-drug) interventions for chronic pain. METHODS/DESIGN: We will search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL: The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with more than 20 participants per trial arm that have evaluated non-drug psychological or non-psychological interventions delivered via an eHealth modality and have pain as an outcome measure will be included. Two review authors will independently extract data and assess the study suitability in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. Studies will be included if they measure at least one outcome variable in accordance with the IMMPACT guidelines (i.e. pain severity, pain interference, physical functioning, symptoms, emotional functioning, global improvement and disposition). Secondary outcomes will be measures of depression and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). A network meta-analysis will be conducted based on direct comparisons to generate indirect comparisons of modalities across treatment trials, which will return rankings for the eHealth modalities in terms of their effectiveness. DISCUSSION: Most trials that use an eHealth intervention to manage chronic pain typically use one modality. As a result, little evidence exists to support which modality type is the most effective. The current review will address this gap in the literature and compare the different eHealth modalities used for technology-assisted interventions for chronic pain. With the growing reliance and use of technology as a medium for delivering treatment for chronic conditions more generally, it is imperative that research identify the most efficacious eHealth modalities and systematically identify the most important features of such treatment types, so they may be replicated and used for research and in the provision of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42016035595.

Prevalence, impact and cost of multimorbidity in a cohort of people with chronic pain in Ireland: a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Multimorbidity (MM) refers to the coexistence of two or more chronic conditions within one person, where no one condition is considered primary. As populations age and healthcare provision improves, MM is becoming increasingly common and poses a challenge to the single morbidity approach to illness management, usually adopted by healthcare systems. Indeed, recent research has shown that 66.2% of the people in primary care in Ireland are living with MM. Healthcare usage and cost is significantly associated with MM, and additional chronic conditions lead to exponential increases in service usage and financial costs, and decreases in physical and mental well-being. Certain conditions, for example, chronic pain, are highly correlated with MM. This study aims to assess the extent, profile, impact and cost of MM among Irish adults with chronic pain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using cluster sampling, participants aged 18 years and over will be recruited from Irish pain clinics and provided an information package and questionnaire asking them to participate in our study at three time points, 1 year apart. The questionnaire will include our specially developed checklist to assess the prevalence and impact of MM, along with validated measures of quality of life, pain, depression and anxiety, and illness perception. Economic data will also be collected, including direct and indirect costs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the Research Ethics Committee of the National University of Ireland, Galway. Dissemination of results will be via journal articles and conference presentations.

Effectiveness of a biopsychosocial e-learning intervention on the clinical judgements of medical students and GP trainees regarding future risk of disability in patients with chronic lower back pain: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic lower back pain (CLBP) is a major healthcare problem with wide ranging effects. It is a priority for appropriate management of CLBP to get individuals back to work as early as possible. Interventions that identify biopsychosocial barriers to recovery have been observed to lead to successfully reduced pain-related work absences and increased return to work for individuals with CLBP. Modern conceptualisations of pain adopt a biopsychosocial approach, such as the flags approach. Biopsychosocial perspectives have been applied to judgements about future adjustment, recovery from pain and risk of long-term disability; and provide a helpful model for understanding the importance of contextual interactions between psychosocial and biological variables in the experience of pain. Medical students and general practitioner (GP) trainees are important groups to target with education about biopsychosocial conceptualisations of pain and related clinical implications. AIM: The current study will compare the effects of an e-learning intervention that focuses on a biopsychosocial model of pain, on the clinical judgements of medical students and trainees. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Medical student and GP trainee participants will be randomised to 1 of 2 study conditions: (1) a 20 min e-learning intervention focused on the fundamentals of the flags approach to clinical judgement-making regarding risk of future pain-related disability; compared with a (2) wait-list control group on judgement accuracy and weighting (ie, primary outcomes); flags approach knowledge, attitudes and beliefs towards pain, judgement speed and empathy (ie, secondary outcomes). Participants will be assessed at preintervention and postintervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be performed in agreement with the Declaration of Helsinki and is approved by the National University of Ireland Galway Research Ethics Committee. The results of the trial will be published according to the CONSORT statement and will be presented at conferences and reported in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN53670726; Pre-results.