Moving pain management programmes into the digital age: development and evaluation of an online PMP for people with chronic pain.

Autor:	Herron K; The Pain Management Programme, The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom., Bradshaw A; The Pain Management Programme, The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom., Liptrot M; The Pain Management Programme, The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom., Wieringa G; Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom., Mathews K; The Pain Management Programme, The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom., Wiles J; The Pain Management Programme, The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom., Johnson S; The Pain Management Programme, The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom.; Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, The University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) [Front Pain Res (Lausanne)] 2024 Apr 04; Vol. 5, pp. 1337734. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Apr 04 (Print Publication: 2024).
DOI:	10.3389/fpain.2024.1337734
Abstrakt:	Introduction: In response to Coronovirus Disease (COVID-19) health care restrictions, the pain management programme delivered group treatment digitally (OPMP). We aimed to: 1) evaluate pain related outcomes of the OPMP, 2) evaluate patient satisfaction and qualitive feedback of the OPMP and 3) compare OPMP outcomes with the pre-pandemic face to face (F2F) PMP outcomes. Methods: Age, gender, pain duration, occupational status, referral information and patient satisfaction data were collected. Pre- and post-treatment pain related outcomes were compared by calculating mean difference, benchmarking with effect size (Cohen's d ) and determining clinically significant change (CSC) for OPMP and F2F PMP. Results: Two-hundred and thirty-seven patients provided outcome data, with 60 completing the OPMP and 177 completing the F2F PMP. OPMP patients were 10 years younger than the F2F PMP (44.8 vs 53.3), more were female (6.5:1 vs 2.8:1), more were working (45% vs 27%) and fewer were retired (3% vs 17%). The OPMP showed improvements comparable to the F2F PMP. Large effect size was reported across all outcome domains including objective physical outcomes. Eighty-one percent of OPMP patients were 'extremely likely' to recommend the programme but just over 50% of patients felt F2F would provide greater clinical benefits. Conclusion: The results support that OPMP is effective for carefully selected patients following a multidisciplinary team assessment however more complex cases still require F2F PMP. Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. (© 2024 Herron, Bradshaw, Liptrot, Wieringa, Mathews, Wiles and Johnson.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu