评估科威德-19 大流行期间在线疼痛管理计划的有效性。

IF 1.5 Q3 RHEUMATOLOGY
Dave P Thompson, Matthew Ramshead, Deborah Antcliff
{"title":"评估科威德-19 大流行期间在线疼痛管理计划的有效性。","authors":"Dave P Thompson, Matthew Ramshead, Deborah Antcliff","doi":"10.1002/msc.1929","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Following the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic and associated social distancing requirements, Pain Services were no longer able to deliver face-to-face Pain Management Programmes (PMP). As an alternative, the Bury Integrated Pain Service developed an interactive, online programme, delivered via Microsoft Teams videoconferencing technology. However, the efficacy of such programmes is unclear. The aim of this project was to assess whether comparable results were observed with online PMPs as with face-to-face PMPs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A non-inferiority study comparing patients attending an online PMP to a historical cohort of patients attending face-to-face PMPs. Analyses of variance were performed to assess between group differences and chi squared tests to compare the proportion of patients making clinically meaningful changes in pain, musculoskeletal health, anxiety, depression and self-efficacy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>24% of patients (n = 9) deemed suitable for the online PMP were unable to participate due to technological difficulties. This resulted in 28 people attending the online PMP. Greater mean reductions in anxiety (GAD-7 mean difference = 1.9; p < 0.05) and depression (PHQ-9 mean difference 3.3; p < 0.05) were observed with face-to-face PMP and a greater proportion of patients made clinically meaningful improvements in musculoskeletal health (face-to-face = 13; online = 5), anxiety (face-to-face = 7; online = 1), and depression (face-to-face = 11; online = 2).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Some patients appear to obtain significant benefit from online PMPs, but this appeared to be to a lesser extent than face-to-face PMPs. It is possible that factors related to the experience of the pandemic influenced these results. However, online PMPs appear to show some promise and further research is warranted to explore the value of online PMPs.</p>","PeriodicalId":46945,"journal":{"name":"Musculoskeletal Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Assessment of the Efficacy of an Online Pain Management Programme During the Covid-19 Pandemic.\",\"authors\":\"Dave P Thompson, Matthew Ramshead, Deborah Antcliff\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/msc.1929\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Following the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic and associated social distancing requirements, Pain Services were no longer able to deliver face-to-face Pain Management Programmes (PMP). As an alternative, the Bury Integrated Pain Service developed an interactive, online programme, delivered via Microsoft Teams videoconferencing technology. However, the efficacy of such programmes is unclear. The aim of this project was to assess whether comparable results were observed with online PMPs as with face-to-face PMPs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A non-inferiority study comparing patients attending an online PMP to a historical cohort of patients attending face-to-face PMPs. Analyses of variance were performed to assess between group differences and chi squared tests to compare the proportion of patients making clinically meaningful changes in pain, musculoskeletal health, anxiety, depression and self-efficacy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>24% of patients (n = 9) deemed suitable for the online PMP were unable to participate due to technological difficulties. This resulted in 28 people attending the online PMP. Greater mean reductions in anxiety (GAD-7 mean difference = 1.9; p < 0.05) and depression (PHQ-9 mean difference 3.3; p < 0.05) were observed with face-to-face PMP and a greater proportion of patients made clinically meaningful improvements in musculoskeletal health (face-to-face = 13; online = 5), anxiety (face-to-face = 7; online = 1), and depression (face-to-face = 11; online = 2).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Some patients appear to obtain significant benefit from online PMPs, but this appeared to be to a lesser extent than face-to-face PMPs. It is possible that factors related to the experience of the pandemic influenced these results. However, online PMPs appear to show some promise and further research is warranted to explore the value of online PMPs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Musculoskeletal Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Musculoskeletal Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/msc.1929\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Musculoskeletal Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/msc.1929","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:随着 Covid-19 大流行病的爆发以及相关的社会疏远要求,疼痛服务机构无法再提供面对面的疼痛管理计划(PMP)。作为替代方案,伯里综合疼痛服务机构开发了一种互动式在线课程,通过微软团队视频会议技术进行授课。然而,此类计划的效果尚不明确。本项目旨在评估在线 PMP 是否能观察到与面对面 PMP 相似的效果:这是一项非劣效性研究,将参加在线 PMP 的患者与参加面对面 PMP 的历史患者进行比较。通过方差分析评估组间差异,通过卡方检验比较在疼痛、肌肉骨骼健康、焦虑、抑郁和自我效能方面做出有临床意义改变的患者比例。结果有 28 人参加了在线 PMP。焦虑的平均降低幅度更大(GAD-7 平均差异 = 1.9;P 结论:一些患者似乎从在线 PMP 中获得了显著的益处:一些患者似乎从在线 PMP 中获得了明显的益处,但这种益处的程度似乎低于面对面的 PMP。可能与大流行病经历有关的因素影响了这些结果。不过,在线 PMP 似乎显示出一定的前景,因此有必要开展进一步研究,探讨在线 PMP 的价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An Assessment of the Efficacy of an Online Pain Management Programme During the Covid-19 Pandemic.

Background: Following the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic and associated social distancing requirements, Pain Services were no longer able to deliver face-to-face Pain Management Programmes (PMP). As an alternative, the Bury Integrated Pain Service developed an interactive, online programme, delivered via Microsoft Teams videoconferencing technology. However, the efficacy of such programmes is unclear. The aim of this project was to assess whether comparable results were observed with online PMPs as with face-to-face PMPs.

Methods: A non-inferiority study comparing patients attending an online PMP to a historical cohort of patients attending face-to-face PMPs. Analyses of variance were performed to assess between group differences and chi squared tests to compare the proportion of patients making clinically meaningful changes in pain, musculoskeletal health, anxiety, depression and self-efficacy.

Results: 24% of patients (n = 9) deemed suitable for the online PMP were unable to participate due to technological difficulties. This resulted in 28 people attending the online PMP. Greater mean reductions in anxiety (GAD-7 mean difference = 1.9; p < 0.05) and depression (PHQ-9 mean difference 3.3; p < 0.05) were observed with face-to-face PMP and a greater proportion of patients made clinically meaningful improvements in musculoskeletal health (face-to-face = 13; online = 5), anxiety (face-to-face = 7; online = 1), and depression (face-to-face = 11; online = 2).

Conclusions: Some patients appear to obtain significant benefit from online PMPs, but this appeared to be to a lesser extent than face-to-face PMPs. It is possible that factors related to the experience of the pandemic influenced these results. However, online PMPs appear to show some promise and further research is warranted to explore the value of online PMPs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Musculoskeletal Care
Musculoskeletal Care RHEUMATOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
88
期刊介绍: Musculoskeletal Care is a peer-reviewed journal for all health professionals committed to the clinical delivery of high quality care for people with musculoskeletal conditions and providing knowledge to support decision making by professionals, patients and policy makers. This journal publishes papers on original research, applied research, review articles and clinical guidelines. Regular topics include patient education, psychological and social impact, patient experiences of health care, clinical up dates and the effectiveness of therapy.
×
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