BACKGROUND: Practitioner beliefs and attitudes towards low back pain (LBP) influence treatment decisions. Little is known about pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs towards LBP. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of educational interventions on pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs towards LBP. Setting Sydney Metropolitan Area. METHODS: Knowledge, attitudes and beliefs was measured using the "Pharmacists' Back Beliefs Questionnaire", with items from two previously reported questionnaires on back beliefs. Responses from pharmacists attending a 2-h educational workshop on LBP (n = 204) and pharmacists recruiting participants for a LBP clinical trial (n = 66) were compared to responses from a control group of pharmacists (n = 65) to allow an evaluation of the two interventions. Responses from workshop participants were also evaluated before and after the session. Participants indicated their agreement with statements about LBP on a 5-point Likert scale. Preferred responses were based on guidelines for the evidence-based management of LBP. The primary analysis evaluated total score on the nine-inevitability items of the Back Beliefs Questionnaire ("inevitability score"). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Inevitability score. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in inevitability score between LBP clinical trial pharmacists and the control group [mean difference (MD) 0.47 (95 % CI -1.35 to 2.29; p = 0.61)]. The educational workshop led to a significant and favourable change in inevitability score (MD 7.23 p < 0.001) and notable changes in responses to misconceptions regarding bed rest and the need for imaging (p < 0.001) among participating pharmacists. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacists attending the educational workshop provided the most compelling evidence that education specifically aimed at delivering evidence-based information can be successful in changing practitioner knowledge, beliefs and attitudes towards LBP.
BACKGROUND: Practitioner beliefs and attitudes towards low back pain (LBP) influence treatment decisions. Little is known about pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs towards LBP. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of educational interventions on pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs towards LBP. Setting Sydney Metropolitan Area. METHODS: Knowledge, attitudes and beliefs was measured using the "Pharmacists' Back Beliefs Questionnaire", with items from two previously reported questionnaires on back beliefs. Responses from pharmacists attending a 2-h educational workshop on LBP (n = 204) and pharmacists recruiting participants for a LBP clinical trial (n = 66) were compared to responses from a control group of pharmacists (n = 65) to allow an evaluation of the two interventions. Responses from workshop participants were also evaluated before and after the session. Participants indicated their agreement with statements about LBP on a 5-point Likert scale. Preferred responses were based on guidelines for the evidence-based management of LBP. The primary analysis evaluated total score on the nine-inevitability items of the Back Beliefs Questionnaire ("inevitability score"). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Inevitability score. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in inevitability score between LBP clinical trial pharmacists and the control group [mean difference (MD) 0.47 (95 % CI -1.35 to 2.29; p = 0.61)]. The educational workshop led to a significant and favourable change in inevitability score (MD 7.23 p < 0.001) and notable changes in responses to misconceptions regarding bed rest and the need for imaging (p < 0.001) among participating pharmacists. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacists attending the educational workshop provided the most compelling evidence that education specifically aimed at delivering evidence-based information can be successful in changing practitioner knowledge, beliefs and attitudes towards LBP.
Authors: Maurits van Tulder; Annette Becker; Trudy Bekkering; Alan Breen; Maria Teresa Gil del Real; Allen Hutchinson; Bart Koes; Even Laerum; Antti Malmivaara Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Steven Z George; Deydre S Teyhen; Samuel S Wu; Alison C Wright; Jessica L Dugan; Guijun Yang; Michael E Robinson; John D Childs Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2009-05-06 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Christopher M Williams; Christopher G Maher; Mark J Hancock; James H McAuley; Andrew J McLachlan; Helena Britt; Salma Fahridin; Christopher Harrison; Jane Latimer Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2010-02-08
Authors: Pankti A Gheewala; Gregory M Peterson; Syed Tabish R Zaidi; Luke Bereznicki; Matthew D Jose; Ronald L Castelino Journal: Int J Clin Pharm Date: 2016-06-21
Authors: Aron Simon Downie; Mark Hancock; Christina Abdel Shaheed; Andrew J McLachlan; Ahmet Baki Kocaballi; Christopher M Williams; Zoe A Michaleff; Chris G Maher Journal: JMIR Med Inform Date: 2020-05-11