ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Many physiotherapists do not feel adequately equipped to address psychosocial risk factors in people with complex pain states. Hence, a biopsychosocial blended intervention (Back2Action) was developed to assist physiotherapists to manage people with persistent spinal pain and coexisting psychosocial risk factors associated with the development or maintenance of persistent pain. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to gain insight into the experiences of physiotherapists with this blended psychosocial intervention. DESIGN: and methods: This was an interpretative qualitative study with a reflexive thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with physiotherapists (N = 15) who delivered Back2Action. The interview started with the grand-tour question: "What was your experience in using Back2Action?" Physiotherapist were encouraged to provide examples, and follow-up questions were posed to ensure a deeper understanding could be reached. RESULTS: Four themes were constructed: Physiotherapists became increasingly aware of (1) their own implicit expectations, biases and skills, and underlying treatment paradigms, and (2) the implicit expectations from their patients towards them. This led to (3) creating a deeper and stronger therapeutic alliance with the patient, but also (4) an understanding that implementation of a true biopsychosocial intervention - even if offered in a blended form - requires more practice, confidence and resources. CONCLUSIONS: Back2Action is considered a valuable treatment to deliver a biopsychosocial intervention in primary care. Considering the high level of knowledge, skills and competency of the participating physiotherapists, the perceived barriers may be more difficult to overcome for more junior physiotherapists.
ABSTRACT
Background: A blended intervention consisting of in-person physiotherapy and psychologically-informed digital health, called Back2Action, was developed to optimise the management of people with persistent spinal pain who also have psychosocial risk factors associated with the development or maintenance of persistent pain. This study aimed to gain insights in how participants experienced this blended intervention. Methods: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews was conducted. Eleven people with persistent non-specific spinal pain who received the blended intervention within a randomised clinical trial were included. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed independently by two researchers. Data were analysed using a thematic analysis. Results: The analysis identified four themes: (1) Experiencing a better understanding of the relationship between own physical and mental health; (2) Importance of the physiotherapist's active involvement in biopsychosocial blended care, which describes the crucial role of physiotherapists in supporting participants in this; (3) Appreciation of digital health, to better understand persistent pain and make meaningful lifestyle changes; and (4) Trials and triumphs, revealing gains such as better coping, but also challenges with implementation of changes into long-term routines. Conclusion: Participants of the blended intervention experienced positive changes in thoughts and behaviours, which highlights the feasibility and acceptability of the blended intervention as a more holistic treatment within pain management. The differences in personal preferences for receiving psychologically-informed digital health poses challenges for implementation of blended biopsychosocial care in evidence-based practice.
