[Development and validation of a questionnaire to assess physiotherapists' postural-structural-biomechanical-oriented beliefs about pain].

IF 1.1 4区医学 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY

Schmerz Pub Date : 2023-10-16 DOI:10.1007/s00482-023-00757-y

Ahura Bassimtabar, Martin Alfuth

{"title":"[Development and validation of a questionnaire to assess physiotherapists' postural-structural-biomechanical-oriented beliefs about pain].","authors":"Ahura Bassimtabar, Martin Alfuth","doi":"10.1007/s00482-023-00757-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Therapists frequently use the postural-structural-biomechanical (PSB) model in clinical practice to explain the symptom of pain using biomechanical deficits. Adequate knowledge about pain encompasses not only the neurophysiology of pain but also knowledge that existing PSB-oriented explanations of the development and enhancement of pain are outdated. There is no assessment to evaluate physiotherapists' PSB-oriented beliefs about pain.Aim: The aim of the present study was to develop a questionnaire to assess physiotherapists' PSB-oriented beliefs about pain and to evaluate its reliability (internal consistency), validity, and agreement.Methods: The Essential Knowledge of Pain Questionnaire (EKPQ) was constructed on the basis of a literature search and discussions between experts. In a pilot study, 32 pupils of a physiotherapy school were then asked to complete the German version of the revised Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire (rNPQ-D) and the EKPQ using the SoSci Survey in order to assess their knowledge and beliefs about pain.Results: The internal consistency of the EKPQ was acceptable with a Cronbach's α = 0.784. There was a strong positive significant correlation between the questionnaires (r = 0.518; p = 0.002). The Bland-Altman analysis revealed a mean difference of 28.9% (± standard deviation of the difference 15.3%) with an upper limit of 95% agreement of 58.8% and a lower limit of 95% agreement of -1.0% between the questionnaires. Participants achieved a mean score of 60.7% in the rNPQ‑D and a mean score of 31.8% in the EKPQ.Conclusion: The newly developed EKPQ questionnaire seems to be a reliable and valid assessment to determine physiotherapists' PSB-oriented beliefs about pain. The results also confirm that a high level of knowledge about the neurophysiology of pain does not exclude a PSB orientation. Whether the EKPQ can be used alongside the rNPQ as an additional assessment to evaluate beliefs about pain should be investigated in the future with suitable study designs, e.g. Delphi study.","PeriodicalId":21572,"journal":{"name":"Schmerz","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Schmerz","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00482-023-00757-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Therapists frequently use the postural-structural-biomechanical (PSB) model in clinical practice to explain the symptom of pain using biomechanical deficits. Adequate knowledge about pain encompasses not only the neurophysiology of pain but also knowledge that existing PSB-oriented explanations of the development and enhancement of pain are outdated. There is no assessment to evaluate physiotherapists' PSB-oriented beliefs about pain.

Aim: The aim of the present study was to develop a questionnaire to assess physiotherapists' PSB-oriented beliefs about pain and to evaluate its reliability (internal consistency), validity, and agreement.

Methods: The Essential Knowledge of Pain Questionnaire (EKPQ) was constructed on the basis of a literature search and discussions between experts. In a pilot study, 32 pupils of a physiotherapy school were then asked to complete the German version of the revised Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire (rNPQ-D) and the EKPQ using the SoSci Survey in order to assess their knowledge and beliefs about pain.

Results: The internal consistency of the EKPQ was acceptable with a Cronbach's α = 0.784. There was a strong positive significant correlation between the questionnaires (r = 0.518; p = 0.002). The Bland-Altman analysis revealed a mean difference of 28.9% (± standard deviation of the difference 15.3%) with an upper limit of 95% agreement of 58.8% and a lower limit of 95% agreement of -1.0% between the questionnaires. Participants achieved a mean score of 60.7% in the rNPQ‑D and a mean score of 31.8% in the EKPQ.

Conclusion: The newly developed EKPQ questionnaire seems to be a reliable and valid assessment to determine physiotherapists' PSB-oriented beliefs about pain. The results also confirm that a high level of knowledge about the neurophysiology of pain does not exclude a PSB orientation. Whether the EKPQ can be used alongside the rNPQ as an additional assessment to evaluate beliefs about pain should be investigated in the future with suitable study designs, e.g. Delphi study.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

[开发和验证一份问卷，以评估理疗师对疼痛的姿势结构生物力学导向的信念]。

背景：治疗师在临床实践中经常使用姿势结构生物力学（PSB）模型来利用生物力学缺陷来解释疼痛症状。关于疼痛的充分知识不仅包括疼痛的神经生理学，还包括现有的以PSB为导向的对疼痛发展和增强的解释已经过时的知识。没有评估物理治疗师对疼痛的PSB导向信念。目的：本研究的目的是开发一份问卷，以评估理疗师对疼痛的PSB导向信念，并评估其可靠性（内部一致性）、有效性和一致性。方法：在文献检索和专家讨论的基础上，编制疼痛基本知识调查表（EKPQ）。在一项试点研究中，一所物理治疗学校的32名学生被要求使用SoSci调查完成德国版修订的疼痛神经生理学问卷（rNPQ-D）和EKPQ，以评估他们对疼痛的知识和信念。结果：EKPQ的内部一致性与Cronbachα = 0.784。调查问卷之间存在极强的正相关（r = 0.518；p = 0.002）。Bland-Altman分析显示，两份问卷之间的平均差异为28.9%（差异的±标准差15.3%），95%的一致性上限为58.8%，95%的符合性下限为-1.0%。参与者在rNPQ-D中的平均得分为60.7%，在EKPQ中的平均分数为31.8%。结论：新开发的EKPQ问卷似乎是一种可靠有效的评估，可以确定理疗师对疼痛的PSB导向信念。研究结果还证实，对疼痛神经生理学的高水平了解并不排除PSB定向。EKPQ是否可以与rNPQ一起用作评估疼痛信念的额外评估，应在未来采用合适的研究设计进行调查，例如德尔菲研究。

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

Schmerz 医学-临床神经学

CiteScore

2.00

自引率

20.00%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Der Schmerz is an internationally recognized journal and addresses all scientists, practitioners and psychologists, dealing with the treatment of pain patients or working in pain research. The aim of the journal is to enhance the treatment of pain patients in the long run. Review articles provide an overview on selected topics and offer the reader a summary of current findings from all fields of pain research, pain management and pain symptom management. Freely submitted original papers allow the presentation of important clinical studies and serve the scientific exchange. Case reports feature interesting cases and aim at optimizing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. Review articles under the rubric ''Continuing Medical Education'' present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice.