Suppr超能文献

对急性腰痛建议的看法:一项随机实验中定性数据的内容分析。

Perceptions of advice for acute low back pain: a content analysis of qualitative data collected in a randomised experiment.

机构信息

School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2024 Jul 23;14(7):e079070. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079070.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To explore how people perceive three different forms of advice for acute low back pain (LBP).

DESIGN

Content analysis of qualitative data collected in a three-arm randomised experiment.

PARTICIPANTS

2200 participants with acute LBP (ie, pain duration for ≤6 weeks) were randomly assigned to receive three types of advice: guideline advice and guideline advice with the addition of either brief pain science or ergonomics messages.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

After receiving the advice, participants answered two questions: 'If your health professional gave you this advice, how would it make you feel?' and 'If your health professional gave you this advice, what treatments (if any) do you think you would need?' Two researchers coded responses using deductive content analysis.

RESULTS

We analysed 4400 free-text responses from 2200 participants. There were little to no differences in participants' feelings, thoughts and expectations after receiving three types of advice for acute LBP. Participants most commonly expressed feeling positive about the advice (38%-35%), reassured (23%-22%) and empowered (10%-8%). Some expressed being unhappy or being frustrated with the advice (4%-3%). Participants most commonly thought they needed no treatment apart from staying active, followed by exercise and medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Guideline advice with or without the addition of brief pain science or ergonomics messages generated positive feelings, reassurance or a sense of empowerment in many people with acute LBP, with no difference between types of advice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12623000364673.

摘要

目的

探讨人们如何看待三种不同形式的急性腰痛(LBP)建议。

设计

对三臂随机试验中收集的定性数据进行内容分析。

参与者

2200 名急性 LBP 患者(即疼痛持续时间≤6 周)被随机分配接受三种类型的建议:指南建议和指南建议加简短疼痛科学或人体工程学信息。

主要和次要结果

在收到建议后,参与者回答了两个问题:“如果您的健康专业人员给您这个建议,您会有什么感觉?”和“如果您的健康专业人员给您这个建议,您认为您需要什么治疗(如果有)?”两位研究人员使用演绎内容分析对回复进行了编码。

结果

我们分析了 2200 名参与者的 4400 份自由文本回复。对于急性 LBP 的三种建议,参与者的感受、想法和期望几乎没有差异。参与者最常表达对建议的积极感受(38%-35%)、放心(23%-22%)和赋权(10%-8%)。有些人对建议感到不满或沮丧(4%-3%)。大多数参与者最常认为他们除了保持活动外不需要治疗,其次是运动和药物治疗。

结论

在急性 LBP 患者中,无论是否添加简短疼痛科学或人体工程学信息,指南建议都能产生积极的感觉、安心或赋权感,不同类型的建议之间没有差异。

试验注册号

ACTRN12623000364673。

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