View Item 

Translating evidence for low back pain management into a consumer-focussed resource for use in community pharmacies: A cluster-randomised controlled trial

Access Status
Open access
Authors
Slater, Helen
Briggs, Andrew
Watkins, K.
Chua, Jason
Smith, Anne
Date
2013
Type
Journal Article

Metadata
Show full item record
Citation
Slater, Helen and Briggs, Andrew M. and Watkins, Kim and Chua, Jason and Smith, Anne J. 2013. Translating evidence for low back pain management into a consumer-focussed resource for use in community pharmacies: A cluster-randomised controlled trial. PLOS ONE. 8 (8), pp. e71918.
Source Title
PLoS ONE
DOI
ISSN
Remarks

Copyright © 2013 Helen Slater, Andrew Briggs, Kim Watkins, Jason Chua and Anne Smith

This article is published under the Open Access publishing model and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/. Please refer to the licence to obtain terms for any further reuse or distribution of this work.

URI
Collection
Abstract

Background: This cluster-randomised controlled trial determined the effectiveness of an evidence-based, pamphlet intervention in improving low back pain (LBP)-related beliefs among pharmacy consumers. Methods: Thirty five community pharmacies were randomised to three groups: pamphlet+education intervention [n = 11]; pamphlet only intervention [n = 11]; control: usual care [n = 13]. Eligibility requirements for clusters included: community-based pharmacies and proprietor participation consent. Pharmacy consumers (N = 317) aged 18-65 years currently experiencing LBP participated. Intervention group allocation depended on the pharmacy attended. Individual-level outcomes were measured at pre-intervention (T0), at two (T1) and eight (T2) weeks post-intervention and included beliefs about LBP [Back Pain Beliefs Questionnaire (BBQ); Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ)]. Secondary outcomes included pain severity, activity impairment and pamphlet perceived usefulness. Blinding to group allocation included primary investigators, outcome assessors and the statistician. Pharmacy staff and consumers were un-blinded.Results: Of 35 pharmacies recruited (317 consumers), no clusters were lost to follow-up. Follow-up was available for n = 24 at 2 weeks only; n = 38 at 8 weeks only; n = 148 at both time points, with n = 148+24+38 = 210 analysed (107 excluded: no follow up). Adjusting for baseline scores demonstrated no significant differences in beliefs (2 or at 8 weeks) between pamphlet (with or without education) versus control, or between 'pamphlet with' versus 'without' education. Work-related fear (FABQ) was significantly lower in consumers receiving pamphlet (with or without education) versus control (difference -2.3, 95%CI: -4.4 to -0.2). There was no significant difference between "pamphlet with" versus "pamphlet without" groups. Consumers receiving the "pamphlet with" reported greater perceived usefulness than consumers receiving the "pamphlet without" (difference 0.9 (95%CI: 0.0 to 1.8)). Conclusion: Community pharmacies provided a feasible primary care portal for implementing evidence-based information. The associated improvement in work-related LBP-beliefs for consumers receiving the pamphlet suggests this simple intervention may be a useful component of care.