Article

Fostering change in back pain beliefs and behaviors: when public education is not enough

Department of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, 2-50 Corbett Hall, 8205 114 St. Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G4, Canada. Electronic address: .
The spine journal: official journal of the North American Spine Society (Impact Factor: 2.9). 10/2012; 12(11). DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2012.09.001
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Mass media campaigns designed to alter societal views and individual behaviors about back pain have been undertaken and evaluated in multiple countries. In contrast to the original Australian campaign, subsequent campaigns have been less successful, with improvements observed in beliefs without the corresponding changes in related behaviors. This article summarizes the results of a literature review, expert panel, and workshop held at the Melbourne International Forum XI: Primary Care Research on Low Back Pain in March 2011 on the role and interplay of various social behavior change strategies, including public education, law and legislation, healthy public policy, and social marketing in achieving a sustained reduction in the societal burden of back pain. Given the complexities inherent to health-related behaviors change, the Rothschild framework is applied in which behavior change strategies are viewed on a continuum from public education at one end through law and health policy at the other. Educational endeavors should likely be augmented with social marketing endeavors and supportive laws and health policy to foster sustained change in outcomes such as work disability and health utilization. Practical suggestions are provided for future interventions aimed at changing back pain-related behaviors. Evaluation of previous back pain mass media campaigns reveals that education alone is unlikely to foster positive and persisting behavioral change without concomitant strategies.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
162 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Low back pain is a challenge for clinicians and researchers, due to the large variability in clinical presentation, lack of consensus regarding diagnostic criteria or clinical classification; wide variation in course and prognosis, and limited success in identifying effective treatments. However, increasing research efforts has generated an expanding body of evidence on the epidemiology, prognosis and treatment of back pain. This paper presents four key developments in research and clinical practice, and describes how these can influence the future direction of back pain research: (1) the increasing awareness of the impact of low back pain on population health; (2) new approaches to describing and investigating course and prognosis of back pain; (3) the need to better understand the bio-psycho-social mechanisms or pathways that explain impact and long-term outcomes in order to inform intervention research; and (4) the potential for stratified models of care to improve patient outcomes and efficiency of care for back pain.
    Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology 10/2013; 27(5):699-708. DOI:10.1016/j.berh.2013.11.001 · 2.90 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The UK government is promoting the health benefits of work, in order to change doctors’ and patients’ behaviour and reduce sickness absence. The rationale is that many people ‘off sick’ would have better outcomes by staying at work; but reducing the costs of health care and benefits is also an imperative. Replacing the ‘sick note’ with the ‘fit note’ and a national educational programme are intended to reduce sickness certification rates, but how will these initiatives impact on doctor-patient relationships and the existing tension between the doctor as patient advocate and gate-keeper to services and benefits? This tension is particularly acute for problems like chronic pain where diagnosis, prognosis and work capacity can be unclear. We interviewed 13 doctors and 30 chronic pain patients about their experiences of negotiating medical certification for work absence and their views of the new policies. Our findings highlight the limitations of naïve rationalist approaches to judgements of work absence and fitness for work for people with chronic pain. Moral, socio-cultural and practical factors are invoked by doctors and patients to contest decisions, and although both groups support the fit note’s focus on capacity, they doubt it will overcome tensions in the consultation. Doctors value tacit skills of persuasion and negotiation that can change how patients conceptualise their illness and respond to it. Policy-makers increasingly recognise the role of this tacit knowledge and we conclude that sick-listing can be improved by further developing these skills and acknowledging the structural context within which protagonists negotiate sick-listing.
    Health 05/2014; DOI:10.1177/1363459314530738 · 2.10 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chronic pain is common in Europe and elsewhere and its under treatment confers a substantial burden on individuals, employers, healthcare systems and society in general. Indeed, the personal and socioeconomic impact of chronic pain is as great as, or greater, than that of other established healthcare priorities. In light of review of recently published data confirming its clinical and socioeconomic impact, this paper argues that chronic pain should be ranked alongside other conditions of established priority in Europe. We outline strategies to help overcome barriers to effective pain care resulting in particular from deficiencies in education and access to interdisciplinary pain management services, We also address the confusion that exists between proper clinical and scientific uses of opioid medications and their potential for misuse and diversion, as reflected in international variations in the access to, and availability of, these agents. As the economic costs are driven in part by the costs of lost productivity, absenteeism and early retirement, pain management should aim to fully rehabilitate patients, rather than merely to relieve pain. Accredited education of physicians and allied health professionals regarding state-of-the-art pain management is crucial. Some progress has been made in this area, but further provision and incentivization is required. We support a tiered approach to pain management, whereby patients with pain uncontrolled by non-specialists are able to consult a physician with a pain competency or a specialist in pain medicine, who in turn can recruit the services of other professionals on a case-by-case basis. A fully integrated interdisciplinary pain service should ideally be available to patients with refractory pain. Governments and healthcare systems should ensure that their policies on controlled medications are balanced, safeguarding public health without undue restrictions that compromise patient care, and that physician education programmes support these aims. Strategic prioritization and co-ordinated actions are required nationally and internationally to address the unacceptable and unnecessary burden of uncontrolled chronic pain that plagues European communities and economies. An appreciation of the 'return on investment' in pain management services will require policymakers to adopt a long-term, cross-budgetary approach.
    BMC Public Health 12/2013; 13(1):1229. DOI:10.1186/1471-2458-13-1229 · 2.32 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
80 Downloads
Available from
May 28, 2014