G Colleary1, K O'Sullivan2, D Griffin3, C G Ryan4, D J Martin1. 1. Health and Social Care Institute, Teesside University, Middlesbrough TS1 3BA, UK. 2. School of Health and Social Care, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland; Sports Spine Centre, Aspetar Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Hospital, Doha, Qatar. 3. School of Health and Social Care, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland. 4. Health and Social Care Institute, Teesside University, Middlesbrough TS1 3BA, UK. Electronic address: c.ryan@tees.ac.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of pain neurophysiology education (PNE) on student physiotherapists': (1) knowledge of chronic pain; (2) attitudes towards patients with chronic pain; and (3) clinical recommendations for patients with chronic pain. DESIGN: Multicentre single-blind randomised controlled trial. SETTING: One UK and one Irish university. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-two student physiotherapists. INTERVENTION: Participants received either PNE (intervention) or a control education. Both were delivered in a 70-minute group lecture. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) The Revised Pain Neurophysiology Quiz to assess knowledge; (2) the Health Care Pain Attitudes and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS) to assess attitudes; and (3) a case vignette to assess the appropriateness of clinical recommendations. RESULTS: Post education, the PNE group had a greater increase in pain neurophysiology knowledge [mean difference 4.0 (95% confidence interval 3.2 to 4.7), P<0.01] and more improved attitudes [-17.5 (95% confidence interval -22.1 to -12.9), P<0.01] compared with the control group. Post education, students in the PNE group were more likely to make appropriate recommendations regarding work (94% vs 56%), exercise (92% vs 56%), activity (94% vs 67%) and bed rest (69% vs 33%) compared with those in the control group (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The improvements in knowledge, attitudes and recommendations for pain management show that PNE is a potentially valuable part of the education of physiotherapy students, and could be used on a more widespread basis. There is a need to investigate whether these findings can be replicated in other healthcare professions, and how well these reported changes lead to changes in actual clinical behaviour and the clinical outcomes of patients.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of pain neurophysiology education (PNE) on student physiotherapists': (1) knowledge of chronic pain; (2) attitudes towards patients with chronic pain; and (3) clinical recommendations for patients with chronic pain. DESIGN: Multicentre single-blind randomised controlled trial. SETTING: One UK and one Irish university. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-two student physiotherapists. INTERVENTION: Participants received either PNE (intervention) or a control education. Both were delivered in a 70-minute group lecture. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) The Revised Pain Neurophysiology Quiz to assess knowledge; (2) the Health Care Pain Attitudes and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS) to assess attitudes; and (3) a case vignette to assess the appropriateness of clinical recommendations. RESULTS: Post education, the PNE group had a greater increase in pain neurophysiology knowledge [mean difference 4.0 (95% confidence interval 3.2 to 4.7), P<0.01] and more improved attitudes [-17.5 (95% confidence interval -22.1 to -12.9), P<0.01] compared with the control group. Post education, students in the PNE group were more likely to make appropriate recommendations regarding work (94% vs 56%), exercise (92% vs 56%), activity (94% vs 67%) and bed rest (69% vs 33%) compared with those in the control group (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The improvements in knowledge, attitudes and recommendations for pain management show that PNE is a potentially valuable part of the education of physiotherapy students, and could be used on a more widespread basis. There is a need to investigate whether these findings can be replicated in other healthcare professions, and how well these reported changes lead to changes in actual clinical behaviour and the clinical outcomes of patients.
Authors: Jocelyn E Blouin; Miranda A Cary; Mackenzie G Marchant; Nancy C Gyurcsik; Danielle R Brittain; Jenelle Zapski Journal: Physiother Can Date: 2019 Impact factor: 1.037
Authors: Jagjit Mankelow; Cormac G Ryan; Paul C Taylor; Maire-Brid Casey; Jenni Naisby; Kate Thompson; Joseph G McVeigh; Chris Seenan; Kay Cooper; Paul Hendrick; Donna Brown; William Gibson; Mervyn Travers; Norelee Kennedy; Cliona O'Riordan; Denis Martin Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2022-07-15 Impact factor: 3.263
Authors: Luis Ceballos-Laita; María Teresa Mingo-Gómez; Francisco Navas-Cámara; Elena Estébanez-de-Miguel; Santos Caudevilla-Polo; Zoraida Verde-Rello; Ana Fernández-Araque; Sandra Jiménez-Del-Barrio Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-11-05 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Richard King; Victoria Robinson; Helene L Elliott-Button; James A Watson; Cormac G Ryan; Denis J Martin Journal: Pain Res Manag Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 3.037