Reassurance use and reassurance-related outcomes for low back pain in primary care: A scoping review.

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Annie Young, Simon D French, Adrian C Traeger, Mark Hancock, Ben Darlow, Leticia Corrêa, Hazel J Jenkins
{"title":"Reassurance use and reassurance-related outcomes for low back pain in primary care: A scoping review.","authors":"Annie Young, Simon D French, Adrian C Traeger, Mark Hancock, Ben Darlow, Leticia Corrêa, Hazel J Jenkins","doi":"10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104753","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We used a scoping review design to map the available evidence describing the use of reassurance in clinical practice, interventions to increase the delivery of reassurance, and reassurance-related outcome measures. We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central from inception to October 2024. Publications were included if they described the use of reassurance or reassurance-related outcome measures in patients with non-specific low back pain (LBP) presenting to primary care. We did not exclude publications on the basis of study design. Data were extracted and charted in accordance with study aims. We included 88 publications describing 66 primary studies. Twenty-one papers described how clinicians used reassurance in primary care, including: information provided (n=16), frequency of use (n=6), challenges providing reassurance (n=7), and importance of individualising reassurance (n=11). Reassurance interventions were investigated in 46 trials. Reassurance interventions were delivered verbally by clinicians to individuals (n=29) or groups (n=14), or via educational materials (n=18). Only one trial measured how reassured the patient felt after the intervention using a single-item non-validated question. Thirty-six trials used indirect measurements of reassurance success, including reductions in: fear-avoidance (n=23), worry (n=8), anxiety (n=8), pain catastrophising (n=10), and further healthcare utilisation (n=12). Relatively few papers have described how clinicians use reassurance in primary care. Reassurance interventions were investigated in 46 trials; however, reassurance was rarely the primary component of the intervention and was often delivered as part of an education intervention. There are no validated measures to directly assess how reassured a patient feels after an intervention. PERSPECTIVE: This review maps the available evidence describing how patient reassurance is used and assessed in the management of low back pain. There is limited assessment of the effectiveness of reassurance interventions. Reassurance is rarely the primary component of interventions and there are no validated measures to directly assess patient reassurance.</p>","PeriodicalId":51095,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain","volume":" ","pages":"104753"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104753","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We used a scoping review design to map the available evidence describing the use of reassurance in clinical practice, interventions to increase the delivery of reassurance, and reassurance-related outcome measures. We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central from inception to October 2024. Publications were included if they described the use of reassurance or reassurance-related outcome measures in patients with non-specific low back pain (LBP) presenting to primary care. We did not exclude publications on the basis of study design. Data were extracted and charted in accordance with study aims. We included 88 publications describing 66 primary studies. Twenty-one papers described how clinicians used reassurance in primary care, including: information provided (n=16), frequency of use (n=6), challenges providing reassurance (n=7), and importance of individualising reassurance (n=11). Reassurance interventions were investigated in 46 trials. Reassurance interventions were delivered verbally by clinicians to individuals (n=29) or groups (n=14), or via educational materials (n=18). Only one trial measured how reassured the patient felt after the intervention using a single-item non-validated question. Thirty-six trials used indirect measurements of reassurance success, including reductions in: fear-avoidance (n=23), worry (n=8), anxiety (n=8), pain catastrophising (n=10), and further healthcare utilisation (n=12). Relatively few papers have described how clinicians use reassurance in primary care. Reassurance interventions were investigated in 46 trials; however, reassurance was rarely the primary component of the intervention and was often delivered as part of an education intervention. There are no validated measures to directly assess how reassured a patient feels after an intervention. PERSPECTIVE: This review maps the available evidence describing how patient reassurance is used and assessed in the management of low back pain. There is limited assessment of the effectiveness of reassurance interventions. Reassurance is rarely the primary component of interventions and there are no validated measures to directly assess patient reassurance.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Pain
Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
7.50%
发文量
441
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pain publishes original articles related to all aspects of pain, including clinical and basic research, patient care, education, and health policy. Articles selected for publication in the Journal are most commonly reports of original clinical research or reports of original basic research. In addition, invited critical reviews, including meta analyses of drugs for pain management, invited commentaries on reviews, and exceptional case studies are published in the Journal. The mission of the Journal is to improve the care of patients in pain by providing a forum for clinical researchers, basic scientists, clinicians, and other health professionals to publish original research.
×
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