↓ Skip to main content

Testing the credibility, feasibility and acceptability of an optimised behavioural intervention (OBI) for avoidant chronic low back pain patients: protocol for a randomised feasibility study

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
242 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Testing the credibility, feasibility and acceptability of an optimised behavioural intervention (OBI) for avoidant chronic low back pain patients: protocol for a randomised feasibility study
Published in
Trials, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-14-172
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tamar Pincus, Shamaila Anwar, Lance McCracken, Alison McGregor, Liz Graham, Michelle Collinson, Amanda J Farrin

Abstract

Chronic back pain continues to be a costly and prevalent condition. The latest NICE guidelines issued in 2009 state that for patients with persistent back pain (of between six weeks and twelve months duration), who are highly distressed and/or disabled and for whom exercise, manual therapy and acupuncture has not been beneficial, the evidence supports a combination of around 100 hours of combined physical and psychological treatment. This is costly, and may prove unacceptable to many patients. A key recommendation of these guidelines was for further randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psychological treatment and to target treatment to specific sub-groups of patients. Recent trials that have included psychological interventions have shown only moderate improvement at best, and results are not maintained long term. There is therefore a need to test theoretically driven interventions that focus on specific high-risk sub-groups, in which the intervention is delivered at full integrity against a credible control.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 242 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 239 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 14%
Student > Bachelor 28 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 11%
Researcher 23 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 7%
Other 35 14%
Unknown 77 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 42 17%
Psychology 32 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Sports and Recreations 8 3%
Other 18 7%
Unknown 83 34%