Suppr超能文献

“误区与事实”教育与“仅事实”教育在背痛信息回忆方面相当,但可能改善恐惧回避信念:一项嵌入式随机试验。

"Myths and Facts" Education Is Comparable to "Facts Only" for Recall of Back Pain Information but May Improve Fear-Avoidance Beliefs: An Embedded Randomized Trial.

出版信息

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2022 Sep;52(9):586-594. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2022.10989. Epub 2022 Jul 8.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of patient education with "myths and facts" versus "facts only" on recall of back pain information and fear-avoidance beliefs in patients with chronic low back pain (LBP).

DESIGN

Randomized Study Within A Trial.

METHODS

One hundred fifty-two participants with chronic LBP were included. Participants allocated to the "facts only" group received an information sheet with 6 LBP facts, whereas those allocated to the "myths and facts" group received the same information sheet, with each myth refuted by its respective fact. The primary outcome was a correct recall of back pain facts, and the secondary outcome was the physical activity component of the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ-PA), 2 weeks after the provision of the information sheet.

RESULTS

There was no evidence of a difference in the proportion of participants with a correct recall between the "myths and facts" and "facts only" groups (odds ratio = 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.48, 1.99) and no significant difference in FABQ-PA mean scores between groups (-1.58; 95% CI: -3.77, 0.61). Sensitivity analyses adjusted for prognostic factors showed no difference in information recall but a larger difference in FABQ-PA scores (-2.3; 95% CI: -4.56, -0.04).

CONCLUSION

We found no overall difference in the recall of back pain information for patients provided with "myths and facts" compared with that for patients provided with "facts only" and a slight reduction in fear-avoidance beliefs for physical activity using "myths and facts" compared with that using "facts only," but the meaningfulness of this result is uncertain. .

摘要

目的

评估“事实与误区”和“仅事实”两种患者教育方法对慢性下背痛(LBP)患者对背痛信息的记忆和恐惧回避信念的影响。

设计

试验内的随机研究。

方法

纳入了 152 名慢性 LBP 患者。分配到“仅事实”组的患者会收到一张包含 6 个 LBP 事实的信息单,而分配到“事实与误区”组的患者则会收到同样的信息单,但每个误区都用对应的事实进行了反驳。主要结局是正确回忆背痛事实的比例,次要结局是恐惧回避信念问卷(FABQ-PA)的身体活动部分,在提供信息单后 2 周进行评估。

结果

“事实与误区”组和“仅事实”组参与者正确回忆的比例没有差异(优势比=0.98;95%置信区间[CI]:0.48,1.99),两组间 FABQ-PA 平均得分也没有显著差异(-1.58;95%CI:-3.77,0.61)。针对预后因素进行的敏感性分析显示,信息回忆没有差异,但 FABQ-PA 得分差异更大(-2.3;95%CI:-4.56,-0.04)。

结论

我们发现,与提供“仅事实”相比,为患者提供“事实与误区”并不会整体上影响对背痛信息的记忆,并且与提供“仅事实”相比,使用“事实与误区”略微降低了对身体活动的恐惧回避信念,但该结果的意义尚不确定。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验