Search

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.

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

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.

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

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

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

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

BACKGROUND: The results of a recently performed RCT (1) showed that the effect of a multidisciplinary treatment of chronic pain patients on body awareness, catastrophizing and depression was improved by adding psychomotor therapy (PMT), an intervention targeting body awareness (BA). No significant effects were found on quality of life and disability. The present follow-up study aims to explore the relationship between improvements in BA and multidisciplinary chronic pain rehabilitation treatment outcome across treatment conditions and the possible mediating effect of BA between treatment conditions. Furthermore, the hypothesis that patients with low BA benefit more from PMT was investigated.METHODS: 94 patients with chronic pain participated in a RCT comparing multidisciplinary treatment as usual (TAU) with TAU plus PMT. Outcome variables were health-related quality of life, disability and depression. Self-efficacy and catastrophizing were the process variables of treatment and the potential mediating factors in the relationship between BA and the outcome variables. The data were analysed by linear mixed model analysis.RESULTS: Improvements in BA were related to improvements in all outcome variables across treatment conditions. The relationships were partly mediated by self-efficacy and/or catastrophizing. In the regression model with depression as the outcome variable the regression coefficient of treatment (i.e. PMT vs. TAU) decreased with 34% and became non-significant when BA was added as a potential mediator. Patients with low body awareness seemed to benefit more from PMT than patients with high body awareness, especially on depression, body awareness and catastrophizing.CONCLUSIONS: BA might be an important target of treatment to improve the multidisciplinary treatment outcome in chronic pain patients. Furthermore, PMT is an intervention that appears to provide its benefits through improving BA and may be especially beneficial for pati

BACKGROUND: The results of a recently performed RCT (1) showed that the effect of a multidisciplinary treatment of chronic pain patients on body awareness, catastrophizing and depression was improved by adding psychomotor therapy (PMT), an intervention targeting body awareness (BA). No significant effects were found on quality of life and disability. The present follow-up study aims to explore the relationship between improvements in BA and multidisciplinary chronic pain rehabilitation treatment outcome across treatment conditions and the possible mediating effect of BA between treatment conditions. Furthermore, the hypothesis that patients with low BA benefit more from PMT was investigated.METHODS: 94 patients with chronic pain participated in a RCT comparing multidisciplinary treatment as usual (TAU) with TAU plus PMT. Outcome variables were health-related quality of life, disability and depression. Self-efficacy and catastrophizing were the process variables of treatment and the potential mediating factors in the relationship between BA and the outcome variables. The data were analysed by linear mixed model analysis.RESULTS: Improvements in BA were related to improvements in all outcome variables across treatment conditions. The relationships were partly mediated by self-efficacy and/or catastrophizing. In the regression model with depression as the outcome variable the regression coefficient of treatment (i.e. PMT vs. TAU) decreased with 34% and became non-significant when BA was added as a potential mediator. Patients with low body awareness seemed to benefit more from PMT than patients with high body awareness, especially on depression, body awareness and catastrophizing.CONCLUSIONS: BA might be an important target of treatment to improve the multidisciplinary treatment outcome in chronic pain patients. Furthermore, PMT is an intervention that appears to provide its benefits through improving BA and may be especially beneficial for pati