Supervised walking in comparison with fitness training for chronic back pain in physiotherapy: results of the SWIFT single-blinded randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN17592092)

Increasing Recreational Physical Activity in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Pragmatic Controlled Clinical Trial

Study Design Prospective, pragmatic, nonrandomized controlled clinical trial. Background Clinical guidelines recommend physical activity for the treatment of chronic low back pain. But engaging patients in physical activity has proven difficult. Known obstacles to physical activity include low self-efficacy and fear avoidance. Objectives This study tested the effectiveness of an enhanced transtheoretical model intervention (ETMI) aimed at increasing recreational physical activity in patients with chronic low back pain, in comparison to usual physical therapy. Methods Patients (n = 220) referred to physical therapy for chronic low back pain were allocated to ETMI or to a control group. The ETMI was delivered by physical therapists and based on behavior-change principles, combined with increased reassurance, therapeutic alliance, and exposure to reduce fear avoidance. The primary outcome was back pain-related disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire). Secondary outcomes included pain intensity, mental and physical health, and levels of physical activity. Results Intention-to-treat analysis in 189 patients at 12 months indicated that patients in the ETMI group had significantly lower disability compared to usual physical therapy. The difference in mean change from baseline between the interventions was 2.7 points (95% confidence interval: 0.9, 4.5) on the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. At 12 months, worst pain, physical activity, and physical health were all significantly better in patients receiving ETMI. The average number of sessions was 3.5 for the ETMI group and 5.1 for controls. Conclusion Targeting obstacles to physical activity with an intervention that includes components to address self-efficacy and fear avoidance appears to be more effective than usual physical therapy care in reducing long-term disability. Further research is needed to explore the mechanisms that impact outcomes in this intervention package. Level of Evidence Therapy, level 2b. Registered June 7, 2012 at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01631344). J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2017;47(2):57-66. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.7057.

Exercise Benefits for Chronic Low Back Pain in Overweight and Obese Individuals

Overweight and obese individuals with chronic low back pain (LBP) struggle with the combined physical challenges of physical activity and pain interference during daily life; perceived disability increases, pain symptoms worsen, and performance of functional tasks and quality of life (QOL) decline. Consistent participation in exercise programs positively affects several factors including musculoskeletal pain, perceptions of disability due to pain, functional ability, QOL, and body composition. It is not yet clear, however, what differential effects occur among different easily accessible exercise modalities in the overweight-obese population with chronic LBP. This narrative review synopsizes available randomized and controlled, or controlled and comparative, studies of easily accessible exercise programs on pain severity, QOL, and other outcomes, such as physical function or body composition change, in overweight-obese persons with chronic LBP. We identified 16 studies (N = 1,351) of various exercise programs (aerobic exercise [AX], resistance exercise [RX], aquatic exercise [AQU], and yoga-Pilates) that measured efficacy on LBP symptoms, and at least one other outcome such as perceived disability, QOL, physical function, and body composition. RX, AQU, and Pilates exercise programs demonstrated the greatest effects on pain reduction, perceived disability, QOL, and other health components. The highest adherence rate occurred with RX and AQU exercise programs, indicating that these types of programs may provide a greater overall impact on relevant outcomes for overweight-obese LBP patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

V.

Using intervention mapping to develop a theory-driven, group-based complex intervention to support self-management of osteoarthritis and low back pain (SOLAS)

BACKGROUND

The Medical Research Council framework provides a useful general approach to designing and evaluating complex interventions, but does not provide detailed guidance on how to do this and there is little evidence of how this framework is applied in practice. This study describes the use of intervention mapping (IM) in the design of a theory-driven, group-based complex intervention to support self-management (SM) of patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and chronic low back pain (CLBP) in Ireland's primary care health system.

METHODS

The six steps of the IM protocol were systematically applied to develop the self-management of osteoarthritis and low back pain through activity and skills (SOLAS) intervention through adaptation of the Facilitating Activity and Self-management in Arthritis (FASA) intervention. A needs assessment including literature reviews, interviews with patients and physiotherapists and resource evaluation was completed to identify the programme goals, determinants of SM behaviour, consolidated definition of SM and required adaptations to FASA to meet health service and patient needs and the evidence. The resultant SOLAS intervention behavioural outcomes, performance and change objectives were specified and practical application methods selected, followed by organised programme, adoption, implementation and evaluation plans underpinned by behaviour change theory.

RESULTS

The SOLAS intervention consists of six weekly sessions of 90-min education and exercise designed to increase participants' physical activity level and use of evidence-based SM strategies (i.e. pain self-management, pain coping, healthy eating for weight management and specific exercise) through targeting of individual determinants of SM behaviour (knowledge, skills, self-efficacy, fear, catastrophizing, motivation, behavioural regulation), delivered by a trained physiotherapist to groups of up to eight individuals using a needs supportive interpersonal style based on self-determination theory. Strategies to support SOLAS intervention adoption and implementation included a consensus building workshop with physiotherapy stakeholders, development of a physiotherapist training programme and a pilot trial with physiotherapist and patient feedback.

CONCLUSIONS

The SOLAS intervention is currently being evaluated in a cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial. IM is a time-intensive collaborative process, but the range of methods and resultant high level of transparency is invaluable and allows replication by future complex intervention and trial developers.

Adverse events experienced by participants in a back pain walking intervention: A descriptive study

OBJECTIVE

To understand the range and potential severity of adverse events reported by patients with back pain who were participating in a walking intervention.

METHODS

Data were obtained from participants in a randomized trial of a pedometer-based Internet-mediated intervention to promote walking and reduce back pain-related disability (n = 229 participants, 118 usual care, and 111 intervention). Participants reported adverse events throughout the 12-month study period. All reported events were reviewed and classified by system, severity, and study relatedness.

RESULTS

A total of 600 adverse events were reported, 250 by those in usual care and nearly 350 by those in the intervention. After worsening back pain (27%), musculoskeletal events were the most commonly reported events (19%), followed by cardiovascular events (14%), infection (11%), and medical procedures (9%). There were three times as many musculoskeletal events in the intervention compared to the usual care group. Cardiovascular events, which were generally not serious and not walking related, were far less common than musculoskeletal injuries.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with chronic back pain can safely engage in a pedometer-based, unsupervised walking program. However, patients may benefit from focused counseling about musculoskeletal risks with specific attention to injury prevention measures such as gradually incrementing activity levels.

Theory-driven group-based complex intervention to support self-management of osteoarthritis and low back pain in primary care physiotherapy: protocol for a cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial (SOLAS)

INTRODUCTION

International clinical guidelines consistently endorse the promotion of self-management (SM), including physical activity for patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) and osteoarthritis (OA). Patients frequently receive individual treatment and advice to self-manage from physiotherapists in primary care, but the successful implementation of a clinical and cost-effective group SM programme is a key priority for health service managers in Ireland to maximise long-term outcomes and efficient use of limited and costly resources.

METHODS/ANALYSIS

This protocol describes an assessor-blinded cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial of a group-based education and exercise intervention underpinned by self-determination theory designed to support an increase in SM behaviour in patients with CLBP and OA in primary care physiotherapy. The primary care clinic will be the unit of randomisation (cluster), with each clinic randomised to 1 of 2 groups providing the Self-management of Osteoarthritis and Low back pain through Activity and Skills (SOLAS) intervention or usual individual physiotherapy. Patients are followed up at 6 weeks, 2 and 6 months. The primary outcomes are the (1) acceptability and demand of the intervention to patients and physiotherapists, (2) feasibility and optimal study design/procedures and sample size for a definitive trial. Secondary outcomes include exploratory analyses of: point estimates, 95% CIs, change scores and effect sizes in physical function, pain and disability outcomes; process of change in target SM behaviours and selected mediators; and the cost of the intervention to inform a definitive trial.

ETHICS/DISSEMINATION

This feasibility trial protocol was approved by the UCD Human Research Ethics-Sciences Committee (LS-13-54 Currie-Hurley) and research access has been granted by the Health Services Executive Primary Care Research Committee in January 2014. The study findings will be disseminated to the research, clinical and health service communities through publication in peer-reviewed journals, presentation at national and international academic and clinical conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN 49875385; Pre-results.

Interpreting Effectiveness Evidence in Pain: Short Tour of Contemporary Issues

There is no shortage of treatment approaches offered to people with pain. The maze of options presents patients and clinicians with difficult choices. Key to making those choices is evidence of treatment effectiveness provided by clinical trials and systematic reviews. Recent growth in the number of clinical trials and systematic reviews, of both high and low quality, makes it vital that users of this evidence-clinicians, researchers, patients, and policy makers-have the skills and knowledge to critically interpret these studies. In this review, we discuss some contemporary issues regarding evidence of effectiveness derived from clinical trials and systematic reviews-issues that we think are critical to understanding the field. We focus on evidence of treatment effectiveness in pain, although many of these issues are relevant to and transferable across the spectrum of evidence-based practice.

Does walking improve disability status, function, or quality of life in adults with chronic low back pain? A systematic review

Objective:

To establish the effectiveness of walking alone and walking compared to other non-pharmacological management methods to improve disability, quality of life, or function in adults with chronic low back pain.

Data sources:

A systematic search of the following databases was undertaken: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Pedro, SportDiscus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The following keywords were used: ‘back pain’ or ‘low back pain’ or ‘chronic low back pain’ and ‘walk*’ or ‘ambulation’ or ‘treadmill*’ or ‘pedometer*’ or ‘acceleromet*’ or ‘recreational’ and ‘disability’ or ‘quality of life’ or ‘function*’.

Review methods:

Primary research studies with an intervention focus that investigated walking as the primary intervention compared to no intervention or any other non-pharmacological method in adults with chronic low back pain (duration >3 months).

Results:

Seven randomised controlled trials involving 869 participants were included in the review. There was no evidence that walking was more effective than other management methods such as usual care, specific strength exercises, medical exercise therapy, or supervised exercise classes. One study found over-ground walking to be superior to treadmill walking, and another found internet-mediated walking to be more beneficial than non-internet-mediated walking in the short term.

Conclusion:

There is low quality evidence to suggest that walking is as effective as other non-pharmacological management methods at improving disability, function, and quality of life in adults with chronic low back pain.

Walking away from back pain: one step at a time - a community-based randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is highly prevalent and a significant public health burden in Western society. Feasibility studies suggest personalised pedometer-driven walking is an acceptable and effective motivating tool in the management of chronic low back pain (CLBP ≥ 12 weeks). The proposed study will investigate pedometer-driven walking as a low cost, easily accessible, and sustainable means of physical activity to improve disability and clinical outcomes for people with CLBP in Saskatchewan, Canada.

METHODS/DESIGN

A fully-powered single-blinded randomised controlled trial will compare back care advice and education with back care advice and education followed by a 12-week pedometer-driven walking programme in adults with CLBP. Adults with self-reported CLBP will be recruited from the community and screened for elibility. Two-hundred participants will be randomly allocated to one of two intervention groups. All participants will receive a single back care advice and education session with a physiotherapist. Participants in the walking group will also receive a physiotherapist-facilitated pedometer based walking programme. The physiotherapist will facilitate the participant to monitor and progress the walking programme, by phone, on a weekly basis over 10 weeks following two face-to-face sessions. Outcome measures of self-reported disability, physical activity, participants' low back pain beliefs/perceptions, quality of life and direct/indirect cost estimates will be gathered at baseline, three months, six months, and 12 months by a different physiotherapist blinded to group allocation. Following intervention, focus groups will be used to explore participants' thoughts and experiences of pedometer-driven walking as a management tool for CLBP.

DISCUSSION

This paper describes the design of a community-based RCT to determine the effectiveness of a pedometer-driven walking programme in the management of CLBP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

United States National Institutes of Health Clinical Trails registry (http://ClinicalTrials.gov/) No. NCT02284958 . Registered on 27(th) October 2014).