Creating and testing a questionnaire to predict immediate and strong positive responders to spinal manipulative therapy for non-specific low back pain. A pilot study.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 REHABILITATION
Stanley Innes, Reece Granger, Jean Théroux
{"title":"Creating and testing a questionnaire to predict immediate and strong positive responders to spinal manipulative therapy for non-specific low back pain. A pilot study.","authors":"Stanley Innes, Reece Granger, Jean Théroux","doi":"10.1186/s12998-023-00510-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many chiropractors use spinal manipulative techniques (SMT) to treat spinal pain. A recent Delphi study posited 18 items across five domains as predictors of patients experiencing non-specific low back pain most likely to experience a strong and immediate positive response to SMT. We sought to create a 'pen and paper' questionnaire that would measure these items and then pilot its use in a clinical setting to determine its 'usability' for a larger study. Knowing this information would inform a more efficacious use of SMT.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Of the 18 items identified in the Delphi study, 13 were deemed historical in nature and readily provided by the chiropractor and patient. A literature search revealed reliable and valid measures for two more items. The remaining three items were generated by creating descriptive questions matched to an appropriate Likert scale. A panel of six chiropractors who had used SMT for at least 7 years when treating non-specific low back pain was formed to evaluate the items for clarity and relevance. Ten Western Australian chiropractors were then recruited to pilot the questionnaire on ten consecutive patients with non-specific low back pain where SMT was used from March to June 2020. Ethics approval was obtained from Murdoch University.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>COVID-19 restrictions impacted on practitioner recruitment and delayed the data collection. Of the intended 100 participants, only 63 could be recruited over a 3-month period from seven chiropractors. Time constraints forced the closure of the data collection. The measures of all predictor items demonstrated ceiling effects. Feedback from open-ended practitioner questions was minimal, suggesting an ease of use.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The length of time and level of participation required to collect the calculated sample size was inadequate and suggested that incentivization may be required for a larger investigation. Significant ceiling effects were found and suggested that participants did so because of a positive bias toward chiropractic care and the use of SMT. The questionnaires in this pilot study require alternative measures and further validation before use in a larger study.</p>","PeriodicalId":48572,"journal":{"name":"Chiropractic & Manual Therapies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10523686/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chiropractic & Manual Therapies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12998-023-00510-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Many chiropractors use spinal manipulative techniques (SMT) to treat spinal pain. A recent Delphi study posited 18 items across five domains as predictors of patients experiencing non-specific low back pain most likely to experience a strong and immediate positive response to SMT. We sought to create a 'pen and paper' questionnaire that would measure these items and then pilot its use in a clinical setting to determine its 'usability' for a larger study. Knowing this information would inform a more efficacious use of SMT.

Method: Of the 18 items identified in the Delphi study, 13 were deemed historical in nature and readily provided by the chiropractor and patient. A literature search revealed reliable and valid measures for two more items. The remaining three items were generated by creating descriptive questions matched to an appropriate Likert scale. A panel of six chiropractors who had used SMT for at least 7 years when treating non-specific low back pain was formed to evaluate the items for clarity and relevance. Ten Western Australian chiropractors were then recruited to pilot the questionnaire on ten consecutive patients with non-specific low back pain where SMT was used from March to June 2020. Ethics approval was obtained from Murdoch University.

Results: COVID-19 restrictions impacted on practitioner recruitment and delayed the data collection. Of the intended 100 participants, only 63 could be recruited over a 3-month period from seven chiropractors. Time constraints forced the closure of the data collection. The measures of all predictor items demonstrated ceiling effects. Feedback from open-ended practitioner questions was minimal, suggesting an ease of use.

Conclusion: The length of time and level of participation required to collect the calculated sample size was inadequate and suggested that incentivization may be required for a larger investigation. Significant ceiling effects were found and suggested that participants did so because of a positive bias toward chiropractic care and the use of SMT. The questionnaires in this pilot study require alternative measures and further validation before use in a larger study.

Abstract Image

创建并测试一份问卷,以预测脊柱手法治疗非特异性腰痛的即时和强阳性反应。一项试点研究。
背景:许多脊医使用脊椎手法治疗脊椎疼痛。德尔菲最近的一项研究认为,五个领域的18个项目是经历非特异性腰痛的患者最有可能对SMT产生强烈而立即的积极反应的预测因素。我们试图创建一份“纸笔”问卷,测量这些项目,然后在临床环境中试用,以确定其在更大规模研究中的“可用性”。了解这些信息将有助于更有效地使用SMT。方法:在德尔菲研究中确定的18个项目中,有13个项目被认为是历史性的,由脊医和患者随时提供。文献检索显示,对另外两个项目采取了可靠有效的措施。剩下的三个项目是通过创建与适当的Likert量表相匹配的描述性问题生成的。成立了一个由六名脊医组成的小组,他们在治疗非特异性腰痛时使用SMT至少7年,以评估这些项目的清晰度和相关性。随后,招募了10名西澳大利亚脊医,对2020年3月至6月连续10名使用SMT的非特异性腰痛患者进行问卷调查。已获得默多克大学的伦理批准。结果:新冠肺炎限制影响了执业医师的招聘,并推迟了数据收集。在预定的100名参与者中,只有63人可以在3个月内从7名脊医那里招募。时间限制迫使数据收集工作结束。所有预测项目的测量都显示了天花板效应。来自开放式从业者问题的反馈很少,这表明它易于使用。结论:收集计算出的样本量所需的时间长度和参与程度不够,这表明可能需要对更大规模的调查进行激励。发现了显著的上限效应,并表明参与者这样做是因为对脊骨神经医学护理和SMT的使用有积极的偏见。这项试点研究中的问卷在用于更大规模的研究之前需要采取替代措施并进行进一步验证。
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
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies Medicine-Complementary and Alternative Medicine
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
15.80%
发文量
48
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Chiropractic & Manual Therapies publishes manuscripts on all aspects of evidence-based information that is clinically relevant to chiropractors, manual therapists and related health care professionals. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies is an open access journal that aims to provide chiropractors, manual therapists and related health professionals with clinically relevant, evidence-based information. Chiropractic and other manual therapies share a relatively broad diagnostic practice and treatment scope, emphasizing the structure and function of the body''s musculoskeletal framework (especially the spine). The practices of chiropractic and manual therapies are closely associated with treatments including manipulation, which is a key intervention. The range of services provided can also include massage, mobilisation, physical therapies, dry needling, lifestyle and dietary counselling, plus a variety of other associated therapeutic and rehabilitation approaches. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies continues to serve as a critical resource in this field, and as an open access publication, is more readily available to practitioners, researchers and clinicians worldwide.
×
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