Kirby Emma R, Broom Alex F, Adams Jon, Sibbritt David W, Refshauge Kathryn M
School of Social Science, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Mar 21;14:131. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-131.
Back pain is an increasingly prevalent health concern amongst Australian women for which a wide range of treatment options are available, offered by biomedical, allied health and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) providers. Although there is an emerging literature on patterns of provider utilisation, less is known about the reasons why women with back pain select their chosen practitioner. In this paper we explore the influences on back pain sufferers' decision-making about treatment seeking with practitioners for their most recent episode of back pain.
Drawing on 50 semi-structured interviews with women aged 60-65 years from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health (ALSWH) who have chronic back pain, we focus on the factors which influence their choice of practitioner. Analysis followed a framework approach to qualitative content analysis, augmented by NVivo 9 qualitative data analysis software. Key themes were identified and tested for rigour through inter-rater reliability and constant comparison.
The women identified four predominant influences on their choice of practitioner for back pain: familiarity with treatment or experiences with individual practitioners; recommendations from social networks; geographical proximity of practitioners; and, qualifications and credentials of practitioners. The therapeutic approach or evidence-base of the practices being utilised was not reported by the women as central to their back pain treatment decision making.
Choice of practitioner appears to be unrelated to the therapeutic approaches, treatment practices or the scientific basis of therapeutic practices. Moreover, anecdotal lay reports of effectiveness and the 'treatment experience' may be more influential than formal qualifications in guiding women's choice of practitioner for their back pain. Further work is needed on the interpersonal, collective and subjective underpinnings of practitioner choice, particularly over time, in order to better understand why women utilise certain practitioners for back pain.
背痛是澳大利亚女性中日益普遍的健康问题,生物医学、辅助医疗以及补充和替代医学(CAM)从业者提供了广泛的治疗选择。尽管关于医疗服务提供者利用模式的文献不断涌现,但对于背痛女性选择其选定从业者的原因却知之甚少。在本文中,我们探讨了对背痛患者针对其最近一次背痛发作寻求治疗时选择从业者的决策产生影响的因素。
基于对澳大利亚女性健康纵向研究(ALSWH)中60 - 65岁患有慢性背痛的女性进行的50次半结构化访谈,我们聚焦于影响她们选择从业者的因素。分析采用定性内容分析的框架方法,并借助NVivo 9定性数据分析软件进行辅助。通过评分者间信度和持续比较确定关键主题并检验其严谨性。
这些女性确定了对她们选择背痛治疗从业者的四个主要影响因素:对治疗的熟悉程度或与个别从业者的经历;社交网络的推荐;从业者的地理位置接近程度;以及从业者的资质和证书。女性并未将所采用治疗方法的治疗途径或循证基础视为其背痛治疗决策的核心因素。
从业者的选择似乎与治疗途径、治疗方法或治疗方法的科学依据无关。此外,在指导女性选择背痛治疗从业者方面,有效性的传闻性非专业报告和“治疗体验”可能比正式资质更具影响力。需要进一步研究从业者选择的人际、集体和主观基础,尤其是随着时间推移的情况,以便更好地理解女性为何选择某些从业者治疗背痛。