CRD 42014009964. [Synnott A, O'Keeffe M, Bunzli S, Dankaerts W, O'Sullivan P, O'Sullivan K (2015) Physiotherapists may stigmatise or feel unprepared to treat people with low back pain and psychosocial factors that influence recovery: a systematic review.Journal of Physiotherapy61: 68-76].

A mix of interpersonal, clinical, and organizational factors are perceived to influence patient-therapist interactions, although research is needed to identify which of these factors actually influence patient-therapist interactions. Physical therapists' awareness of these factors could enhance patient interactions and treatment outcomes. Mechanisms to best enhance these factors in clinical practice warrant further study.

Background In contrast to best practice guidelines for knee osteoarthritis (OA), findings from several different healthcare settings have identified that nonsurgical treatments are underused and TKA is overused. Empirical evidence and qualitative observations suggest that patients’ willingness to accept nonsurgical interventions for knee OA is low. A qualitative investigation of why patients may feel that such interventions are of little value may be an important step toward increasing their use in the treatment of knee OA Questions/purposes This qualitative study was embedded in a larger study investigating patient-related factors (beliefs/attitudes toward knee OA and its treatment) and health-system related factors (access, referral pathways) known to influence patients’ decisions to seek medical care. In this paper we focus on the patient-related factors with the aim of exploring why patients may feel that nonsurgical interventions are of little value in the treatment of knee OA. Methods A cross-sectional qualitative study was conducted in a single tertiary hospital in Australia. Patients with endstage knee OA on the waiting list for TKA were approached during their preadmission appointment and invited to participate in one-to-one interviews. As prescribed by the qualitative approach, data collection and data analysis were performed in parallel and recruitment continued until the authors agreed that the themes identified would not change through interviews with subsequent participants, at which point, recruitment stopped. Thirty-seven patients were approached and 27 participated. Participants were 48% female; mean age was 67 years. Participants’ beliefs about knee OA and its treatment were identified in the interview transcripts. Beliefs were grouped into five belief dimensions: identity beliefs (what knee OA is), causal beliefs (what causes knee OA), consequence beliefs (what the consequences of knee OA are), timeline beliefs (how long knee OA lasts) and treatment beliefs (how knee OA can be controlled). Results All participants believed that their knee OA was “bone on bone” (identity beliefs) and most (> 14 participants) believed it was caused by “wear and tear” (causal beliefs). Most (> 14 participants) believed that loading the knee could further damage their “vulnerable” joint (consequence beliefs) and all believed that their pain would deteriorate over time (timeline beliefs). Many (>20 participants) believed that physiotherapy and exercise interventions would increase pain and could not replace lost knee cartilage. They preferred experimental and surgical treatments which they believed would replace lost cartilage and cure their knee pain (treatment beliefs). Conclusions Common misconceptions about knee OA appear to influence patients’ acceptance of nonsurgical, evidence-based treatments such as exercise and weight loss. Once the participants in this study had been “diagnosed” with “bone-on-bone” changes, many disregarded exercise-based interventions which they believed would damage their joint, in favor of alternative and experimental treatments, which they believed would regenerate lost knee cartilage. Future research involving larger, more representative samples are needed to understand how widespread these beliefs are and if/how they influence treatment decisions. In the meantime, clinicians seeking to encourage acceptance of nonsurgical interventions may consider exploring and targeting misconceptions that patients hold about the identity, causes, consequences, timeline, and treatment of knee OA. Level of Evidence Level II, prognostic study.

No abstract

Synopsis Pain-related fear is implicated in the transition from acute to chronic low back pain and the persistence of disabling low back pain, making it a key target for physical therapy intervention. The current understanding of pain-related fear is that it is a psychopathological problem, whereby people who catastrophize about the meaning of pain become trapped in a vicious cycle of avoidance behavior, pain, and disability, as recognized in the fear-avoidance model. However, there is evidence that pain-related fear can also be seen as a common-sense response to deal with low back pain, for example, when one is told that one's back is vulnerable, degenerating, or damaged. In this instance, avoidance is a common-sense response to protect a "damaged" back. While the fear-avoidance model proposes that when someone first develops low back pain, the confrontation of normal activity in the absence of catastrophizing leads to recovery, the pathway to recovery for individuals trapped in the fear-avoidance cycle is less clear. Understanding pain-related fear from a common-sense perspective enables physical therapists to offer individuals with low back pain and high fear a pathway to recovery by altering how they make sense of their pain. Drawing on a body of published work exploring the lived experience of pain-related fear in people with low back pain, this clinical commentary illustrates how Leventhal's common-sense model may assist physical therapists to understand the broader sense-making processes involved in the fear-avoidance cycle, and how they can be altered to facilitate fear reduction by applying strategies established in the behavioral medicine literature. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2017;47(9):628-636. Epub 13 Jul 2017. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.7434.

Background: Beliefs about the body and pain play a powerful role in behavioural and emotional responses to musculoskeletal pain. What a person believes and how they respond to their musculoskeletal pain can influence how disabled they will be by pain. Importantly, beliefs are modifiable and are therefore considered an important target for the treatment of painrelated disability. Clinical guidelines recommend addressing unhelpful beliefs as the first line of treatment in all patients presenting with musculoskeletal pain. However, many clinicians hold unhelpful beliefs themselves; while others feel ill-equipped to explore and target the beliefs driving unhelpful responses to pain. As a result, clinicians may reinforce unhelpful beliefs, behaviours and resultant disability among the patients they treat. Methods: To assist clinicians, in Part 1 of this paper we discuss what beliefs are; how they are formed; the impact they can have on a person's behaviour, emotional responses and outcomes of musculoskeletal pain. In Part 2, we discuss how we can address beliefs in clinical practice. A clinical case is used to illustrate the critical role that beliefs can have on a person's journey from pain and disability to recovery. Conclusions: We encourage clinicians to exercise self-reflection to explore their own beliefs and better understand their biases, which may influence their management of patients with musculoskeletal pain. We suggest actions that may benefit their practice, and we propose key principles to guide a process of behavioural change.

ObjectivesClinicians who use the biopsychosocial approach to manage musculoskeletal pain disorders aim to understand how patients make sense of their symptoms. Treatment includes targeting the negative beliefs and coping responses that can lead to progressive pain and disability. We aimed to explore how people seeking care for persistent hip pain and disability make sense of their symptoms.MethodsCross-sectional qualitative study. People were eligible if they were aged ≥18 years, were consulting an orthopaedic surgeon for persistent hip pain and offered a non-surgical intervention. Data were collected through interviews that explored patients’ beliefs about the identity (diagnosis), causes, consequences, timeline and controllability of their symptoms, their strategies to cope with pain and their experiences in seeking healthcare. Transcribed interview data were analysed thematically using a framework approach.ResultsSixteen people (median age=51, range=33–73 years; median duration hip pain=3 years, range=3 months–20 years) participated. Most participants (10/16) believed their pain was caused by an exercise-related injury. Because of the results of imaging and interactions with healthcare professionals, all participants believed they had damaged hip structures. All described ineffective strategies to manage their pain and multiple failed treatments. For many (7/16), a lack of control over symptoms threatened their physical and mental health.ConclusionsThe way participants with persistent hip pain and disability made sense of their symptoms contributed to them avoiding physical activity, and it impaired their sleep, emotional well-being and physical health.

ObjectivesSystematically review the qualitative literature on living with knee osteoarthritis from patient and carer perspectives.DesignSystematic review of qualitative studies. Five electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus) were searched from inception until October 2018. Data were synthesised using thematic and content analysis.ParticipantsStudies exploring the experiences of people living with knee osteoarthritis, and their carers were included. Studies exploring experiences of patients having participated in specific interventions, including surgery, or their attitudes about the decision to proceed to knee replacement were excluded.ResultsTwenty-six articles reporting data from 21 studies about the patient (n=665) and carer (n=28) experience of living with knee osteoarthritis were included. Seven themes emerged: (i) Perceived causes of knee osteoarthritis are multifactorial and lead to structural damage to the knee and deterioration over time (n=13 studies), (ii) Pain and how to manage it predominates the lived experience (n=19 studies), (iii) Knee osteoarthritis impacts activity and participation (n=16 studies), (iv) Knee osteoarthritis has a social impact (n=10 studies), (v) Knee osteoarthritis has an emotional impact (n=13 studies), (vi) Interactions with health professionals can be positive or negative (n=11 studies), (vii) Knee osteoarthritis leads to life adjustments (n=14 studies). A single study reporting the perspectives of carers reported similar themes. Psychosocial impact of knee osteoarthritis emerged as a key factor in the lived experience of people with knee osteoarthritis.ConclusionsThis review highlights the value of considering patient attitudes and experiences including psychosocial factors when planning and implementing management options for people with knee osteoarthritis.Trial registrationnumberCRD42018108962