Reneman Michiel F, Waterschoot Franka P C, Bennen Elseline, Schiphorst Preuper Henrica R, Dijkstra Pieter U, Geertzen Jan H B
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Center for Rehabilitation, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 30.002, 9750, RA, Haren, The Netherlands.
Center for Human Movement Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018 Jun 30;19(1):206. doi: 10.1186/s12891-018-2125-4.
There is a large and unexplained practice variation in prescribed dosages of pain rehabilitation programs (PRP), and evidence regarding the optimum dosage is unknown.
To explore perspectives of patients and rehabilitation professionals regarding dosages of PRP an explorative qualitative research design was performed with thematic analysis. Patients and rehabilitation professionals were recruited from three rehabilitaton centers in the Netherlands. A purposive sample of patients who completed a PRP, with a range of personal and clinical characteristics was included. Rehabilitation professionals from all different disciplines, working within multidisciplinary PRP for a minimum of two years, for at least 0.5 fte were included. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 patients undergoing PRP, and three focus groups were formed with a total of 17 rehabilitation professionals involved in PRP.
All patients were satisfied with received dosage. Factors important in relation to dosage of PRP were categorized into patient related characteristics (case complexity from a biopsychosocial perspective) to treatment related characteristics (logistics and format of the program, interaction between patients and professionals), and external factors (support from others, costs, traveling distance and injury compensation). Professionals concluded that dosage was currently based on historical grounds and clinical expertise.
Patients and professionals from different centers considered the same factors related to dosage of PRP, but these considerations (from patients and professionals) led to different dose choices between centers. PRP dosage appeared to be mainly based on historical grounds and clinical expertise. The insights of this study could assist in future research regarding optimum dosage of PRP and rehabilitation programs in general.
疼痛康复项目(PRP)的规定剂量存在很大且无法解释的实践差异,关于最佳剂量的证据尚不清楚。
为了探索患者和康复专业人员对PRP剂量的看法,采用探索性定性研究设计并进行主题分析。患者和康复专业人员来自荷兰的三个康复中心。纳入了一个有目的的样本,这些患者完成了PRP,具有一系列个人和临床特征。纳入了来自所有不同学科、在多学科PRP中工作至少两年、至少0.5全时当量的康复专业人员。对12名接受PRP的患者进行了个体半结构化访谈,并组建了三个焦点小组,共有17名参与PRP的康复专业人员。
所有患者对所接受的剂量都感到满意。与PRP剂量相关的重要因素分为患者相关特征(从生物心理社会角度看病例复杂性)、治疗相关特征(项目的后勤和形式、患者与专业人员之间的互动)以及外部因素(他人的支持、成本、出行距离和工伤赔偿)。专业人员得出结论,目前剂量是基于历史依据和临床专业知识确定的。
不同中心的患者和专业人员考虑了与PRP剂量相关的相同因素,但这些考虑(患者和专业人员的)导致不同中心之间的剂量选择不同。PRP剂量似乎主要基于历史依据和临床专业知识。本研究的见解有助于未来关于PRP最佳剂量以及一般康复项目的研究。