A Cross-Sectional Study Assessing Treatment Preference of People With Chronic Low Back Pain

Francois, Sara J.; Lanier, Vanessa M.; Marich, Andrej V.; Wallendorf, Michael; Dillen, Linda R. Van

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2018.04.027

Cited by 12 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Details of the process selection can be found in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram in Figure. Table 1 lists the 13 selected studies. [41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53] A majority of these studies (n = 7) were published during the past 5 years and mainly originated from Europe (n = 7) and the United States (n = 3). This shows that the topic of health preferences is increasingly gaining importance in the Western world.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 1 lists the 13 selected studies. 41 - 53 A majority of these studies (n = 7) were published during the past 5 years and mainly originated from Europe (n = 7) and the United States (n = 3). This shows that the topic of health preferences is increasingly gaining importance in the Western world.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[44][45][46][51][52][53] Consequently, only six studies investigated a specific preference for one of the treatments. [41][42][43][47][48]50 Surgical treatment and acupuncture seemed to be less frequently preferred than other alternatives, such as physical exercise and medication. Most studies were about physical activities and compared various types of exercise, but no obvious tendency appeared.…”

Section: Attribute Importance/ranking Treatment Modality (Levels)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Attributes Underlying Non-surgical Treatment Choice for People With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Mixed Studies Review

Poder

Beffarat

2020

Int J Health Policy Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The knowledge of patients’ preferences in the medical decision-making process is gaining in importance. In this article we aimed to provide an overview on the importance of attributes underlying the choice of non-surgical treatments in people with low back pain (LBP). Methods: A systematic mixed studies review was conducted. Articles were retrieved from the search engines PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Scopus through June 21, 2018. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess the quality of the study, and each step was performed by 2 reviewers. Analysis: From a total of 390 articles, 13 were included in the systematic review, all of which were considered to be of good quality. Up to 40 attributes were found in studies using various methods. Effectiveness, ie, pain reduction, was the most important attribute considered by patients in their choice of treatment. This attribute was cited by 7 studies and was systematically ranked first or second in each. Other important attributes included the capacity to realize daily life activities, fit to patient’s life, and the credibility of the treatment, among others. Discussion: Pain reduction was the most important attribute underlying patients’ choice for treatment. However, this was not the only trait, and future research is needed to determine the relative importance of the attributes.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Attribute Importance/ranking Treatment Modality (Levels)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Attributes Underlying Non-surgical Treatment Choice for People With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Mixed Studies Review

Poder

Beffarat

2020

Int J Health Policy Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This suggests that clinicians may be more focused on treatment e cacy and safety than on personal and lifestyle needs of the patient. These factors have been shown to in uence treatment acceptance, compliance, and continuation [40][41][42] ; thus, a better awareness of the part of clinicians on patient convenience and administration preference may be warranted.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and Validation of a Psoriasis Treatment Acceptability Measure through Group Concept Mapping

Hudgens

Howerter

Keith

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Psoriasis is a common autoimmune dermatologic condition which has a pronounced negative impact on patient quality of life and disease burden. Currently, there are a number of treatments available for psoriasis, with differences in efficacy, mechanism of action, mode of administration, adverse effects, and tolerability. However, a reliable, validated patient-reported instrument to address patient expectations and of psoriasis treatment has not been developed. This project was undertaken with the aim of developing a fit-for-purpose self-reported instrument to inform patient expectations and preferences of psoriasis treatments.Methods: Two studies, both utilizing qualitative and quantitative methods, were conducted in patients within the entire spectrum of psoriasis severity. In Study 1, a group concept mapping (GCM) exercise was conducted with dermatologists and moderate-to-severe psoriasis patients to identify concepts important in the treatment of psoriasis. In Study 2, a preliminary Treatment Acceptability Questionnaire (TAQ) was developed using GCM-derived concepts from Studies 1 and 2, followed by cognitive debriefing (CD) telephone interviews of the preliminary TAQ. In Study 2, another GCM exercise was conducted with mild and newly diagnosed psoriasis patients. Psychometric analyses were performed on the TAQ to evaluate validity and reliability.Results: The Study 1 GCM exercise generated 43 concepts from moderate-to-severe psoriasis patients (n=20) and dermatologists (n=10). In Study 2, 37 GCM concepts were generated from mild and newly diagnosed psoriasis patients (n=20). From the 2 GCM exercises, 28 concepts were selected to form the preliminary TAQ; CD interviews indicated strong understanding and relevance of TAQ items among patients with disease ranging from mild to severe. The final TAQ consisted of 20 items; psychometric analysis demonstrated strong validity and reliability of the TAQ. Conclusions: The TAQ is a novel psychometrically validated fit-for-purpose patient-reported instrument to inform healthcare providers of patients’ expectations of and preferences for treatment of their psoriasis and can help in shared decision making between patients and physicians.

show abstract

“…The 39-item acceptability questionnaire covered four areas: 1) overall programme; 2) therapist-led sessions; 3) self-administered sessions; and 4) the computer programme and iPad use. In each area, questions across four dimensions were adopted from Francois et al (55). These dimensions were: 1) perceived effectiveness -how participants perceive the programme allowed them to acquire, practise and master the cognitive strategies (13 items); 2) relevancy -views regarding appropriateness of the program for older people and applicability of the daily activities (9 items); 3) convenience -participant perceptions of how easy it was to participate in the programme (7 items); and 4) clarity -participant perceptions of whether the programme was logical and easy to understand, including if instructions were appropriate to complete the required activities (10 items).…”

Section: Feasibility Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

The feasibility and acceptability of an app-based cognitive strategy training programme for older people.

Tulliani

Bye

Bissett

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Increasing numbers of people are living with mild cognitive impairment in later life and seeking therapy to maintain cognition to remain as independent as possible in daily life. Based on a review of literature, an app-based programme using perceptual-encoding strategies called Enhancing Memory in Daily Life (E-MinD Life) was developed. An expert panel reviewed the programme’s appropriateness for older people with and without mild cognitive impairment. As part of the design process, the feasibility and acceptability of the E-MinD Life programme was then assessed in relation to its use by healthy older adults, with findings informing the application of the programme to older people with mild cognitive impairment in the future. Methods: Phase One: The E-MinD Life programme was reviewed by an expert panel of occupational therapists. Experts rated the programme on a Likert scale and answered open-ended questions in relation to feasibility, clarity, and relevancy. Phase Two involved field-testing the 9-week programme with a sample of nine healthy older people. Participants rated the acceptability of the programme on a Likert scale questionnaire. Data on recruitment rates and retention, adherence and duration of sessions was collected to determine feasibility of the programme. Responses to the Likert scale were analysed using descriptive statistics. Open-ended responses were categorised qualitatively using a constant comparative approach. Results: Phase One: Experts indicated that the E-MinD Life programme was feasible and included relevant activities for community living. Although experts felt that an older user with MCI would be able to independently complete the programme, the qualitative analysis suggests formatting changes in future iterations of the programme to enhance visual clarity. Phase Two: All participants completed the nine-week programme. The average number of self-administered sessions attempted over the nine-week period was 13.44 (SD=6.73) out of 18 scheduled sessions. Overall, most participants found the programme relevant, logical and easy to understand, and perceived it to be effective for functional cognitive problems. Conclusion: The E-MinD Life programme shows promise for the inclusion into trial designs to determine the effectiveness of the cognitive strategy programme for older people with and without cognitive impairment. Trial registration: NCT03430401 Registered 1 February 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03430401?term=karen+liu&draw=2&rank=1

show abstract

A Cross-Sectional Study Assessing Treatment Preference of People With Chronic Low Back Pain

Cited by 12 publications

References 43 publications

Attributes Underlying Non-surgical Treatment Choice for People With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Mixed Studies Review

Attributes Underlying Non-surgical Treatment Choice for People With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Mixed Studies Review

Development and Validation of a Psoriasis Treatment Acceptability Measure through Group Concept Mapping

The feasibility and acceptability of an app-based cognitive strategy training programme for older people.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About