评估妊娠后慢性骨盆带痛(EMaPP)的管理:一项随机对照可行性试验。

IF 1.5 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Bradley Halliday, Sarah Chatfield, Lee Cameron, Joanne Hosking, Jade Chynoweth, Lauren Stockley, Matthew Bailey, Jill Shawe, Annie Hawton, Chris Hayward, Kirsty Carter, Jennifer Freeman
{"title":"评估妊娠后慢性骨盆带痛(EMaPP)的管理:一项随机对照可行性试验。","authors":"Bradley Halliday, Sarah Chatfield, Lee Cameron, Joanne Hosking, Jade Chynoweth, Lauren Stockley, Matthew Bailey, Jill Shawe, Annie Hawton, Chris Hayward, Kirsty Carter, Jennifer Freeman","doi":"10.1186/s40814-025-01638-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Postpartum pelvic girdle pain (PGP), experienced by approximately 10% of women, is typically refractory to conservative management. Customised dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses (DEFOs) are one novel option to address this. We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a randomised controlled trial comparing a DEFO plus standardised advice/exercises (intervention) versus standardised advice/exercise alone (control).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multicentre randomised controlled feasibility trial with embedded qualitative study and economic evaluation. Participants were randomised to either intervention or control group. All received two remote physiotherapy sessions via videoconferencing separated by 14 days. Primary feasibility outcomes were related to the feasibility and acceptability of methods and interventions, recruitment, intervention fidelity, outcome measure performance and completion. The proposed primary outcome measure for the definitive trial was the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) which assessed pain intensity fortnightly over 24 weeks. Secondary outcome measures assessed kinesiophobia, continence, function, health-related quality of life, depression and health/care resource use at baseline, 12 and 24 weeks. Adverse events were recorded. Pre-defined progression criteria were set to decide whether, and how, to proceed with a future definitive trial: (1) Target sample size (60 from 3 centres over a 7-month recruitment period), (2) outcome measure completion (> 60% at 24 weeks), (3) orthosis wear-time compliance (> 70% for 6 h/day) as measured by the Orthotimer, and (4) evidence suggesting efficacy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 180 participants sent information sheets, 40 were screened and 24 randomised. At 24 weeks, 95% completed NPRS and 89-95% the secondary outcome measures. Wear-time adherence appeared below the set target of 42 h per week. Outcomes were broadly comparable between groups. Recruitment was insufficient to estimate a signal of efficacy with confidence. Two intervention participants experienced Candida infections, considered possibly due to the DEFO.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Trial procedures and interventions were acceptable to participants. Technical Orthotimer issues are resolvable through modification of recording parameters. Recruitment of participants was a major challenge. Work to understand how best to engage women in this research is needed before moving to a definitive trial.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ISCRTN, ISRCTN67232113. Registered 08/05/2021, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN67232113 .</p>","PeriodicalId":20176,"journal":{"name":"Pilot and Feasibility Studies","volume":"11 1","pages":"54"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12023510/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the Management of chronic Pelvic girdle Pain following pregnancy (EMaPP): a randomised controlled feasibility trial.\",\"authors\":\"Bradley Halliday, Sarah Chatfield, Lee Cameron, Joanne Hosking, Jade Chynoweth, Lauren Stockley, Matthew Bailey, Jill Shawe, Annie Hawton, Chris Hayward, Kirsty Carter, Jennifer Freeman\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40814-025-01638-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Postpartum pelvic girdle pain (PGP), experienced by approximately 10% of women, is typically refractory to conservative management. Customised dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses (DEFOs) are one novel option to address this. We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a randomised controlled trial comparing a DEFO plus standardised advice/exercises (intervention) versus standardised advice/exercise alone (control).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multicentre randomised controlled feasibility trial with embedded qualitative study and economic evaluation. Participants were randomised to either intervention or control group. All received two remote physiotherapy sessions via videoconferencing separated by 14 days. Primary feasibility outcomes were related to the feasibility and acceptability of methods and interventions, recruitment, intervention fidelity, outcome measure performance and completion. The proposed primary outcome measure for the definitive trial was the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) which assessed pain intensity fortnightly over 24 weeks. Secondary outcome measures assessed kinesiophobia, continence, function, health-related quality of life, depression and health/care resource use at baseline, 12 and 24 weeks. Adverse events were recorded. Pre-defined progression criteria were set to decide whether, and how, to proceed with a future definitive trial: (1) Target sample size (60 from 3 centres over a 7-month recruitment period), (2) outcome measure completion (> 60% at 24 weeks), (3) orthosis wear-time compliance (> 70% for 6 h/day) as measured by the Orthotimer, and (4) evidence suggesting efficacy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 180 participants sent information sheets, 40 were screened and 24 randomised. At 24 weeks, 95% completed NPRS and 89-95% the secondary outcome measures. Wear-time adherence appeared below the set target of 42 h per week. Outcomes were broadly comparable between groups. Recruitment was insufficient to estimate a signal of efficacy with confidence. Two intervention participants experienced Candida infections, considered possibly due to the DEFO.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Trial procedures and interventions were acceptable to participants. Technical Orthotimer issues are resolvable through modification of recording parameters. Recruitment of participants was a major challenge. Work to understand how best to engage women in this research is needed before moving to a definitive trial.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ISCRTN, ISRCTN67232113. Registered 08/05/2021, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN67232113 .</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20176,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pilot and Feasibility Studies\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"54\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12023510/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pilot and Feasibility Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-025-01638-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pilot and Feasibility Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-025-01638-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:产后骨盆带痛(PGP),经历了大约10%的妇女,是典型的难以保守管理。定制动态弹性织物矫形器(defo)是解决这一问题的一种新选择。我们评估了一项随机对照试验的可行性和可接受性,比较DEFO加标准化建议/练习(干预)与单独标准化建议/练习(对照)。方法:采用多中心随机对照可行性试验,嵌入定性研究和经济评价。参与者被随机分为干预组和对照组。所有人都通过视频会议接受了两次远程物理治疗,间隔14天。主要可行性结果与方法和干预措施的可行性和可接受性、招募、干预逼真度、结果测量的表现和完成度有关。建议的最终试验的主要结果测量是数字疼痛评定量表(NPRS),该量表在24周内每两周评估疼痛强度。次要结局指标评估了基线、12周和24周时的运动恐惧症、失禁、功能、健康相关生活质量、抑郁和健康/护理资源使用情况。记录不良事件。设定了预先定义的进展标准,以决定是否以及如何进行未来的最终试验:(1)目标样本量(来自3个中心的60人,为期7个月的招募期),(2)结果测量完成度(24周时> 60%),(3)矫形器测量的矫形器佩戴时间依从性(> 70%,6小时/天),以及(4)证据表明有效性。结果:在发送信息表的180名参与者中,筛选了40名,随机选择了24名。24周时,95%的患者完成了NPRS, 89-95%的患者完成了次要结果测量。磨损时间的坚持似乎低于每周42小时的设定目标。两组之间的结果具有广泛的可比性。招募不足以自信地估计有效性的信号。两名干预参与者经历了念珠菌感染,被认为可能是由于DEFO。结论:试验程序和干预措施对参与者是可接受的。通过修改记录参数可以解决正弦波技术问题。招募参加者是一项重大挑战。在进行最终试验之前,需要努力了解如何最好地让女性参与这项研究。试验注册号:ISCRTN, ISRCTN67232113。2021年5月8日注册,https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN67232113。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating the Management of chronic Pelvic girdle Pain following pregnancy (EMaPP): a randomised controlled feasibility trial.

Background: Postpartum pelvic girdle pain (PGP), experienced by approximately 10% of women, is typically refractory to conservative management. Customised dynamic elastomeric fabric orthoses (DEFOs) are one novel option to address this. We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a randomised controlled trial comparing a DEFO plus standardised advice/exercises (intervention) versus standardised advice/exercise alone (control).

Methods: A multicentre randomised controlled feasibility trial with embedded qualitative study and economic evaluation. Participants were randomised to either intervention or control group. All received two remote physiotherapy sessions via videoconferencing separated by 14 days. Primary feasibility outcomes were related to the feasibility and acceptability of methods and interventions, recruitment, intervention fidelity, outcome measure performance and completion. The proposed primary outcome measure for the definitive trial was the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) which assessed pain intensity fortnightly over 24 weeks. Secondary outcome measures assessed kinesiophobia, continence, function, health-related quality of life, depression and health/care resource use at baseline, 12 and 24 weeks. Adverse events were recorded. Pre-defined progression criteria were set to decide whether, and how, to proceed with a future definitive trial: (1) Target sample size (60 from 3 centres over a 7-month recruitment period), (2) outcome measure completion (> 60% at 24 weeks), (3) orthosis wear-time compliance (> 70% for 6 h/day) as measured by the Orthotimer, and (4) evidence suggesting efficacy.

Results: Of 180 participants sent information sheets, 40 were screened and 24 randomised. At 24 weeks, 95% completed NPRS and 89-95% the secondary outcome measures. Wear-time adherence appeared below the set target of 42 h per week. Outcomes were broadly comparable between groups. Recruitment was insufficient to estimate a signal of efficacy with confidence. Two intervention participants experienced Candida infections, considered possibly due to the DEFO.

Conclusions: Trial procedures and interventions were acceptable to participants. Technical Orthotimer issues are resolvable through modification of recording parameters. Recruitment of participants was a major challenge. Work to understand how best to engage women in this research is needed before moving to a definitive trial.

Trial registration: ISCRTN, ISRCTN67232113. Registered 08/05/2021, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN67232113 .

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
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
Pilot and Feasibility Studies Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
5.90%
发文量
241
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: Pilot and Feasibility Studies encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of pilot and feasibility studies in biomedicine. The journal publishes research articles that are intended to directly influence future clinical trials or large scale observational studies, as well as protocols, commentaries and methodology articles. The journal also ensures that the results of all well-conducted, peer-reviewed, pilot and feasibility studies are published, regardless of outcome or significance of findings. Pilot and feasibility studies are increasingly conducted prior to a full randomized controlled trial. However, these studies often lack clear objectives, many remain unpublished, and there is confusion over the meanings of the words “pilot” and “feasibility”. Pilot and Feasibility Studies provides a forum for discussion around this key aspect of the scientific process, and seeks to ensure that these studies are published, so as to complete the publication thread for clinical 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