Can Motivational Factors Predict Adherence to an Exercise Program for Subjects with Low Back Pain?

Granlund, Brittmarie; Brulin, Christine; Johansson, Håkan; Sojka, Peter

doi:10.1080/02845719808408498

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some studies used the distribution of participants’ adherence data to assign a value of satisfactory adherence. For example, Granlund et al 28 used the median value of participants’ adherence results to dichotomise them into adherent or non-adherent groups, whereas van Gool et al 29 ordered the participants according to their adherence results, then divided them into three equally sized groups described as ‘low’, ‘intermediate’ or ‘high’ adherence.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining adherence to therapeutic exercise for musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining adherence to therapeutic exercise for musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Self-efficacy seems to be an important outcome in evaluating patients with CLBP as it can predict disability [5][6][7][8][9][10][11], adherence to treatment [16], and the likelihood of chronicity [12]. Therefore, it is important to develop a self-efficacy evaluation questionnaire that can assist in providing better physical and biopsychosocial treatment for these patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of measurement properties of the Brazilian-Portuguese version of the low back activity confidence scale (LoBACS) in patients with chronic low back pain

Dias¹,

Silva²,

Bela³

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Low Back Activity Confidence Scale (LoBACS) assesses the self-efficacy to perform activities in individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP). As self-efficacy appears to directly influence the patient’s functional capacity and prognosis, it is important to develop a scale that evaluates this attribute to guide treatment strategy and monitor the clinical course of patients. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness of the Brazilian version of the LoBACS. The scale was applied to 112 male and female patients (age, 18–65 years) with specific and nonspecific CLBP. For evaluating the interobserver reliability, the scale was applied twice on the first evaluation day by two trained evaluators (A and B). Within 48–72 h of the first evaluation, assessor A reapplied the scale to evaluate intraobserver reliability (test–retest), which was analyzed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The first LoBACS applied in the baseline evaluation was also used to assess the construct validity of the scale by factor analysis. For responsiveness, the scale was applied 5 times at 2-week intervals and the change in scores was analyzed by the repeated measures ANOVA. Although factor analysis indicated three subscales, they did not present acceptable values of convergent and divergent validity. Reliability ranged from good to excellent, with ICC values of .90 (95% CI, .84; .93) and .85 (95% CI, .77; .91) for inter- and intraobserver variability for total score. Moreover, the total score was responsive in all comparisons, with no floor or ceiling effects. Thus, only the total score of the Brazilian version of LoBACS proved to be reliable, valid, and responsive.

show abstract

“…example, Granlund et al (1998)28 used the median value of participants' adherence results to dichotomise them into…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining adherence to therapeutic exercise for musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To establish the meaning of the term 'adherence' (including conceptual and measurement definitions) in the context of therapeutic exercise (TE) for musculoskeletal (MSK) pain.Design: Systematic review using a search strategy including terms for: adherence, TE and MSK pain.Identified studies were independently screened for inclusion by two researchers. Two independent researchers extracted data on: study type; MSK pain population; type of TE used; definitions, parameters, measurement methods, and values of adherence.Data sources: Seven electronic databases were searched from inception to December 2016.Eligibility Criteria: Any study type featuring TE for adults with MSK pain and containing a definition of adherence, or a description of how adherence was measured.Results: 459 studies were identified and 86 were included in the review. Most were prospective cohort studies and featured back and/or neck pain. Strengthening and stretching were the most common types of TE. A clearly identifiable definition of adherence was provided in 40% of the studies, with 12% using the same definition. Exercise frequency was the most commonly measured parameter of adherence, with self-report logs the most common measurement method. The most common value range used to determine satisfactory adherence was 80-99% of the recommended exercise dose. Conclusion:No single definition of adherence to TE was apparent. We found no definition of adherence that specifically related to TE for MSK pain or described the dimensions of TE that should be measured. We recommend conceptualising adherence to TE for MSK pain from the perspective of all relevant stakeholders.

show abstract

Can Motivational Factors Predict Adherence to an Exercise Program for Subjects with Low Back Pain?

Cited by 5 publications

References 34 publications

Defining adherence to therapeutic exercise for musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review

Defining adherence to therapeutic exercise for musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review

Assessment of measurement properties of the Brazilian-Portuguese version of the low back activity confidence scale (LoBACS) in patients with chronic low back pain

Defining adherence to therapeutic exercise for musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About