Primary care barriers and facilitators to nonpharmacologic treatments for low back pain: A qualitative pilot study

Pm & R Pub Date : 2024-05-02 DOI:10.1002/pmrj.13183
Eric J. Roseen, Christopher Joyce, Sophie Winbush, Natalie Pavco‐Luttschwager, Natalia E. Morone, Robert B. Saper, Stephen Bartels, Kushang V. Patel, Julie J. Keysor, Jonathan F. Bean, Lance D. Laird
{"title":"Primary care barriers and facilitators to nonpharmacologic treatments for low back pain: A qualitative pilot study","authors":"Eric J. Roseen, Christopher Joyce, Sophie Winbush, Natalie Pavco‐Luttschwager, Natalia E. Morone, Robert B. Saper, Stephen Bartels, Kushang V. Patel, Julie J. Keysor, Jonathan F. Bean, Lance D. Laird","doi":"10.1002/pmrj.13183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundClinical practice guidelines encourage primary care providers (PCPs) to recommend nonpharmacologic treatment as first‐line therapy for low back pain (LBP). However, the determinants of nonpharmacologic treatment use for LBP in primary care remain unclear, particularly in low‐income settings.ObjectiveTo pilot a framework‐informed interview guide and codebook to explore determinants of nonpharmacologic treatment use in primary care.MethodsIn this qualitative interview study, we enrolled PCPs and community health workers (CHWs) from four primary care clinics at a safety net hospital. A semistructured interview guide informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided inquiry on barriers/facilitators to nonpharmacologic treatments for LBP (eg, acupuncture, chiropractic care, physical therapy). We included questions on whether current CHW roles may address barriers to nonpharmacologic treatment use. Interviews were audio‐recorded, transcribed verbatim, and independently coded by four investigators. An a priori codebook composed of CFIR determinants and known CHW roles guided deductive content analysis to identify major themes.ResultsEight individuals (six PCPs, two CHWs; age range: 32–51 years, five female) participated in hour‐long interviews. Half had worked at the hospital for ≥15 years and all reported seeing patients with LBP (range: 2–20 patients per week). All participants identified the following CFIR factors as barriers/facilitators: nonpharmacologic treatment characteristics (perceived cost, relative advantage compared to other treatments); outer setting (patient needs/resources, limited connections with community‐based nonpharmacologic treatment) and PCP characteristics (attitudes/beliefs about nonpharmacologic treatments). Although participants indicated several CHW roles could be adapted to address barriers (eg, care coordination, resource linking, case management), other roles seemed less feasible (eg, targeted health education) in our health care system.ConclusionsPreliminary insight on key determinants of nonpharmacologic treatments for LBP should be further examined in large multisite studies. Future studies may also determine whether a CHW‐led strategy can improve nonpharmacologic treatment access and clinical outcomes in primary care.","PeriodicalId":20287,"journal":{"name":"Pm & R","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pm & R","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pmrj.13183","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundClinical practice guidelines encourage primary care providers (PCPs) to recommend nonpharmacologic treatment as first‐line therapy for low back pain (LBP). However, the determinants of nonpharmacologic treatment use for LBP in primary care remain unclear, particularly in low‐income settings.ObjectiveTo pilot a framework‐informed interview guide and codebook to explore determinants of nonpharmacologic treatment use in primary care.MethodsIn this qualitative interview study, we enrolled PCPs and community health workers (CHWs) from four primary care clinics at a safety net hospital. A semistructured interview guide informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided inquiry on barriers/facilitators to nonpharmacologic treatments for LBP (eg, acupuncture, chiropractic care, physical therapy). We included questions on whether current CHW roles may address barriers to nonpharmacologic treatment use. Interviews were audio‐recorded, transcribed verbatim, and independently coded by four investigators. An a priori codebook composed of CFIR determinants and known CHW roles guided deductive content analysis to identify major themes.ResultsEight individuals (six PCPs, two CHWs; age range: 32–51 years, five female) participated in hour‐long interviews. Half had worked at the hospital for ≥15 years and all reported seeing patients with LBP (range: 2–20 patients per week). All participants identified the following CFIR factors as barriers/facilitators: nonpharmacologic treatment characteristics (perceived cost, relative advantage compared to other treatments); outer setting (patient needs/resources, limited connections with community‐based nonpharmacologic treatment) and PCP characteristics (attitudes/beliefs about nonpharmacologic treatments). Although participants indicated several CHW roles could be adapted to address barriers (eg, care coordination, resource linking, case management), other roles seemed less feasible (eg, targeted health education) in our health care system.ConclusionsPreliminary insight on key determinants of nonpharmacologic treatments for LBP should be further examined in large multisite studies. Future studies may also determine whether a CHW‐led strategy can improve nonpharmacologic treatment access and clinical outcomes in primary care.
初级保健对腰背痛非药物治疗的障碍和促进因素:定性试点研究
背景临床实践指南鼓励初级保健提供者(PCPs)推荐非药物治疗作为腰背痛(LBP)的一线疗法。目标试行一个以框架为基础的访谈指南和编码手册,以探索在初级保健中使用非药物治疗的决定因素。方法在这项定性访谈研究中,我们招募了一家安全网医院的四个初级保健诊所的初级保健医生和社区保健员(CHWs)。在实施研究综合框架(CFIR)的指导下,我们采用了半结构化访谈指南,对腰椎间盘突出症非药物治疗(如针灸、脊椎按摩、理疗)的障碍/促进因素进行了调查。我们还提出了关于当前社区保健工作者的角色是否可以解决非药物治疗使用障碍的问题。访谈由四名调查人员进行录音、逐字记录和独立编码。由 CFIR 决定因素和已知 CHW 角色组成的先验编码手册指导演绎内容分析,以确定主要主题。其中一半人在医院工作了≥15 年,所有人都说自己看过腰痛患者(范围:每周 2-20 名患者)。所有参与者都将以下 CFIR 因素视为障碍/促进因素:非药物治疗特征(感知成本、与其他治疗方法相比的相对优势);外部环境(患者需求/资源、与社区非药物治疗的联系有限)和初级保健医生特征(对非药物治疗的态度/信念)。尽管参与者表示可以调整几种社区保健工作者的角色来解决障碍(例如,护理协调、资源链接、病例管理),但在我们的医疗保健系统中,其他角色似乎不太可行(例如,有针对性的健康教育)。未来的研究还将确定以社区保健工作者为主导的策略能否改善非药物治疗的可及性以及初级保健的临床效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信