Difference between physical therapist estimation and psychological patient-reported outcome measures in patients with low back pain


Autoři: Takahiro Miki aff001;  Yu Kondo aff001;  Tsuneo Takebayashi aff002;  Hiroshi Takasaki aff003
Působiště autorů: Department of Rehabilitation, Sapporo Maruyama Orthopedic Hospital, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan aff001;  Department of Orthopedic, Sapporo Maruyama Orthopedic Hospital, Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan aff002;  Department of Physical Therapy, Saitama Prefectural University, Koshigaya, Saitama, Japan aff003
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 15(1)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227999

Souhrn

Minimizing the number of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can reduce patient burden. The primary aim of the present study was to investigate whether physical therapists (PTs) can estimate psychological PROM scores in patients with low back pain (LBP) through physical therapy evaluation. The secondary aims were; 1) to investigate whether the clinical experiences of PTs influence correlations between PT estimates and psychological PROM scores, and 2) to investigate the sensitivity and specificity of PT estimates for the psychological features detected by the PROMs. We recruited hospitalized patients owing to LBP, who underwent evaluation by PTs on the initial day of hospitalization. Patients completed PROMs, including the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale immediately before the initial physical therapy session. PTs rated the magnitude of patient kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing, anxiety, and depression using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS; 0 = not detected at all, 10 = very highly detected) through physical therapy evaluation immediately after the initial session. The PTs were blinded to the PROM results. We categorized PTs into two subgroups (PTs with ≥4 years and those with <4 years of clinical experience). Data from 78 patients (mean [SD] age = 60.5 [16.3] years) and 21 PTs were analyzed. A statistically significant but weak correlation (P = .04, Spearman’s ρ = .24) was detected only in the total PCS scores and PT NRS scores in a dataset of all patients and PTs. Further, there were no statistically significant differences in correlations (all P >.05) between the two subgroups of PTs in all measures. Low sensitivity and high specificity of PT estimates for psychological features through physical therapy evaluation were identified in all PROMs when PT NRS scores were categorized into the binary score by 5 (negative: <5; positive: ≥5).

Klíčová slova:

Anxiety – Depression – Diagnostic medicine – Lower back pain – Pain psychology – Physiotherapy – Psychometrics – Questionnaires


Zdroje

1. Vlaeyen JW, Linton SJ. Fear-avoidance and its consequences in chronic musculoskeletal pain: a state of the art. Pain. 2000;85: 317–32. doi: 10.1016/s0304-3959(99)00242-0 10781906

2. Melloh M, Elfering A, Egli Presland C, Roder C, Hendrick P, Darlow B, et al. Predicting the transition from acute to persistent low back pain. Occup Med (Lond). 2011;61: 127–31.

3. Reme SE, Tangen T, Moe T, Eriksen HR. Prevalence of psychiatric disorders in sick listed chronic low back pain patients. Eur J Pain. 2011;15: 1075–80. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2011.04.012 21592832

4. Jellema P, van der Windt DA, van der Horst HE, Blankenstein AH, Bouter LM, Stalman WA. Why is a treatment aimed at psychosocial factors not effective in patients with (sub)acute low back pain? Pain. 2005;118: 350–9. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2005.09.002 16289797

5. Al-Obaidi SM, Al-Zoabi B, Al-Shuwaie N, Al-Zaabie N, Nelson RM. The influence of pain and pain-related fear and disability beliefs on walking velocity in chronic low back pain. Int J Rehabil Res. 2003;26: 101–8. doi: 10.1097/00004356-200306000-00004 12799603

6. Beales D, Kendell M, Chang RP, Hamso M, Gregory L, Richardson K, et al. Association between the 10 item Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire and physiotherapists' perception of the contribution of biopsychosocial factors in patients with musculoskeletal pain. Man Ther. 2016;23: 48–55. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2016.03.010 27183836

7. Ferraz MB, Quaresma MR, Aquino LR, Atra E, Tugwell P, Goldsmith CH. Reliability of pain scales in the assessment of literate and illiterate patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 1990;17: 1022–4. 2213777

8. Price DD, Bush FM, Long S, Harkins SW. A comparison of pain measurement characteristics of mechanical visual analogue and simple numerical rating scales. Pain. 1994;56:217–26. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(94)90097-3 8008411

9. Jensen MP, Turner JA, Romano JM. What is the maximum number of levels needed in pain intensity measurement? Pain. 1994;58: 387–92. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(94)90133-3 7838588

10. Roland M, Morris R. A study of the natural history of back pain. Part I: development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1983;8: 141–4.

11. Janssen MF, Birnie E, Bonsel GJ. Quantification of the level descriptors for the standard EQ-5D three-level system and a five-level version according to two methods. Qual Life Res. 2008;17: 463–73. doi: 10.1007/s11136-008-9318-5 18320352

12. Sullivan M. The pain catastrophizing scale: user manual: Montreal; 2009;1–36.

13. Swinkels-Meewisse EJ, Swinkels RA, Verbeek AL, Vlaeyen JW, Oostendorp RA. Psychometric properties of the Tampa Scale for kinesiophobia and the fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire in acute low back pain. Man Ther. 2003;8:29–36. doi: 10.1054/math.2002.0484 12586559

14. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983;67: 361–70. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x 6880820

15. Fujiwara A, Kobayashi N, Saiki K, Kitagawa T, Tamai K, Saotome K. Association of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score with the Oswestry Disability Index, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, and short-form 36. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28: 1601–7.

16. Shiroiwa T, Ikeda S, Noto S, Igarashi A, Fukuda T, Saito S, et al. Comparison of Value Set Based on DCE and/or TTO Data: Scoring for EQ-5D-5L Health States in Japan. Value Health. 2016;19: 648–54. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.03.1834 27565282

17. van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng YS, Kohlmann T, Busschbach J, Golicki D, et al. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health. 2012;15: 708–15. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008 22867780

18. Nishigami T, Mibu A, Tanaka K, Yamashita Y, Watanabe A, Tanabe A. Psychometric properties of the Japanese version of short forms of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale in participants with musculoskeletal pain: A cross-sectional study. J Orthop Sci. 2017;22: 351–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jos.2016.11.015 28087217

19. Matsuoka H, Sakano Y. Assessment of cognitive aspect of pain: Development, reliability, and validation of Japanese version of pain catastrophizing scale. Jpn J Psychosom Med. 2007;47: 95–102.

20. Kikuchi N, Matsudaira K, Sawada T, Oka H. Psychometric properties of the Japanese version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK-J) in patients with whiplash neck injury pain and/or low back pain. J Orthop Sci. 2015;20:985–92. doi: 10.1007/s00776-015-0751-3 26201395

21. Matsudaira T, Igarashi H, Kikuchi H, Kano R, Mitoma H, Ohuchi K, et al. Factor structure of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale in Japanese psychiatric outpatient and student populations. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009; 7:42. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-7-42 19445722

22. Andresen EM. Criteria for assessing the tools of disability outcomes research. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000;81:S15–20. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2000.20619 11128900

23. Haggman S, Maher CG, Refshauge KM. Screening for symptoms of depression by physical therapists managing low back pain. Phys Ther. 2004;84: 1157–66. 15563256

24. Latimer J, Maher C, Refshauge K. The attitudes and beliefs of physiotherapy students to chronic back pain. Clin J Pain. 2004;20: 45–50. doi: 10.1097/00002508-200401000-00009 14668656

25. Takasaki H, Elkins MR, Moseley AM. Use of the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) in Japan. Phys Ther Res. 2016; 19:58–66. doi: 10.1298/ptr.e9881 28289582

26. Takasaki H, Saiki T, Iwasada Y. McKenzie Therapists Adhere More to Evidence-Based Guidelines and Have a More Biopsychosocial Perspective on the Management of Patients with Low Back Pain than General Physical Therapists in Japan. Open Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation. 2014;02: 173–81.

27. WCPT.org. Japan: a profile of the profession 2019 [cited 2019 12/20]. Available from: https://www.wcpt.org/node/150087/cds.

28. Takasaki H, Gabel CP. Cross-cultural adaptation of the 12-item Örebro musculoskeletal screening questionnaire to Japanese (ÖMSQ-12-J), reliability and clinicians' impressions for practicality. J Phys Ther Sci. 2017;29: 1409–15. doi: 10.1589/jpts.29.1409 28878473

29. Matsudaira K, Oka H, Kikuchi N, Haga Y, Sawada T, Tanaka S. Psychometric Properties of the Japanese Version of the STarT Back Tool in Patients with Low Back Pain. PLoS One. 2016;11: e0152019. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152019 27002823

30. Calley DQ, Jackson S, Collins H, George SZ. Identifying patient fear-avoidance beliefs by physical therapists managing patients with low back pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2010;40: 774–83. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2010.3381 20972338

31. Springer S, Gleicher H, Hababou H. Attitudes and beliefs about musculoskeletal pain and its association with pain neuroscience knowledge among physiotherapy students in Israel. Isr J Health Policy Res. 2018;7: 67. doi: 10.1186/s13584-018-0266-4 30551742

32. Daykin AR, Richardson B. Physiotherapists' pain beliefs and their influence on the management of patients with chronic low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004;29: 783–95.

33. Gardner T, Refshauge K, Smith L, McAuley J, Hubscher M, Goodall S. Physiotherapists' beliefs and attitudes influence clinical practice in chronic low back pain: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies. J Physiother. 2017;63: 132–43. doi: 10.1016/j.jphys.2017.05.017 28655562

34. Learman KE, Ellis AR, Goode AP, Showalter C, Cook CE. Physical therapists' clinical knowledge of multidisciplinary low back pain treatment guidelines. Phys Ther. 2014;94: 934–46. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20130567 24604903


Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS One


2020 Číslo 1