Geoff P Bostick1. 1. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, 2-50 Corbett Hall, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2G4. Electronic address: bostick@ualberta.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Psychological treatments delivered by non-psychologists have been proposed as a way to increase access to care to address important psychological barriers to recovery in people with low back pain (LBP). PURPOSE: This review aimed to synthesize randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assess the effectiveness of psychological interventions delivered by non-psychologists in reducing pain intensity and disability in adults with LBP, compared with usual care. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review without meta-analysis was carried out. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials including adult patients with all types of musculoskeletal LBP were eligible. Interventions included those based on psychological principles and delivered by non-psychologists. The primary outcomes of interest were self-reported pain intensity and disability. Information sources included Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Registrar for Controlled Trials. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used for the evaluation of internal validity. RESULTS: There were 1,101 records identified, 159 were assessed for eligibility, 16 were critically appraised, and 11 studies were included. Mild to moderate risk of bias was present in the included studies, with personnel and patient blinding, treatment fidelity, and attrition being the most common sources of bias. Considerable heterogeneity existed for patient population, intervention components, and comparison groups. Although most studies demonstrated statistical and clinical improvements in pain and disability, few were statistically superior to the comparison group. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the broader psychological literature, psychological interventions delivered by non-psychologists have modest effects on low back pain and disability. Additional high quality research is needed to understand what patients are likely to respond to psychological interventions, the appropriate dose to achieve the desired outcome, the amount of training required to implement psychological interventions, and the optimal procedures to ensure treatment fidelity.
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Psychological treatments delivered by non-psychologists have been proposed as a way to increase access to care to address important psychological barriers to recovery in people with low back pain (LBP). PURPOSE: This review aimed to synthesize randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assess the effectiveness of psychological interventions delivered by non-psychologists in reducing pain intensity and disability in adults with LBP, compared with usual care. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review without meta-analysis was carried out. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials including adult patients with all types of musculoskeletal LBP were eligible. Interventions included those based on psychological principles and delivered by non-psychologists. The primary outcomes of interest were self-reported pain intensity and disability. Information sources included Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Registrar for Controlled Trials. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used for the evaluation of internal validity. RESULTS: There were 1,101 records identified, 159 were assessed for eligibility, 16 were critically appraised, and 11 studies were included. Mild to moderate risk of bias was present in the included studies, with personnel and patient blinding, treatment fidelity, and attrition being the most common sources of bias. Considerable heterogeneity existed for patient population, intervention components, and comparison groups. Although most studies demonstrated statistical and clinical improvements in pain and disability, few were statistically superior to the comparison group. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the broader psychological literature, psychological interventions delivered by non-psychologists have modest effects on low back pain and disability. Additional high quality research is needed to understand what patients are likely to respond to psychological interventions, the appropriate dose to achieve the desired outcome, the amount of training required to implement psychological interventions, and the optimal procedures to ensure treatment fidelity.
Authors: Gwendolijne Scholten-Peeters; Michel W Coppieters; Lisette Bijker; Leonore de Wit; Pim Cuijpers; Eva Poolman Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-01-07 Impact factor: 2.692