RESUMO
Introduction: Distress is part of the experiences and care for people with chronic low back pain. However, distress is often pathologised and individualised; it is seen as a problem within the individual in pain and something to be downplayed, avoided, or fixed. To that end, we situate distress as a normal everyday relational experience circulating, affecting, moving in, through, and across bodies. Challenging practices that may amplify distress, we draw on the theorisation of affect as a relational assemblage to analyse physiotherapy clinical encounters in the care of people with chronic low back pain. Methods: Adopting a critical reflexive ethnographic approach, we analyse data from a qualitative project involving 15 ethnographic observations of patient-physiotherapist interactions and 6 collaborative dialogues between researchers and physiotherapists. We foreground conceptualisations of distress- and what they make (im)possible-to trace embodied assemblage formations and relationality when caring for people with chronic low back pain. Results: Our findings indicate that conceptualisation matters to the clinical entanglement, particularly how distress is recognised and navigated. Our study highlights how distress is both a lived experience and an affective relation-that both the physiotherapist and people with chronic low back pain experience distress and can be affected by and affect each other within clinical encounters. Discussion: Situated at the intersection of health sociology, sociology of emotions, and physiotherapy, our study offers a worked example of applying an affective assemblage theoretical framework to understanding emotionally imbued clinical interactions. Viewing physiotherapy care through an affective assemblage lens allows for recognising that life, pain, and distress are emerging, always in flux. Such an approach recognises that clinicians and patients experience distress; they are affected by and affect each other. It demands a more humanistic approach to care and helps move towards reconnecting the inseparable in clinical practice-emotion and reason, body and mind, carer and cared for.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a significant health problem worldwide and requires a biopsychosocial treatment approach. Access to traditional pain medicine specialist services is limited and innovative treatment models are required to support patients in tertiary care. The study evaluated the clinical effectiveness and safety of the Treatment Access Pathway (TAP), an allied health expanded scope model of care which included innovative group assessment and collaboration with patients to create individualized treatment plans. METHODS: One hundred and eighty-one patients referred to a tertiary level chronic pain service were randomly allocated to either the TAP or the waitlist study groups. Primary (pain interference) and secondary outcome measures were collected at recruitment and again at 6 months. Per-protocol analyses were utilized due to high participant attrition (46% across groups). RESULTS: The TAP group reported greater reductions in pain interference at 6 months than waitlist group (0.9, 95% CI: 0.2-1.6), with more than half of the TAP group (52%) reporting clinically significant improvement. In addition, statistically significant differences between the TAP and waitlist groups were observed for objective measurements of walking endurance (5.4 m, 95% CI: 1.7-9.1); and global impressions of change (1.4 unit decrease, 95% CI: 1-1.9). Nil adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that an expanded scope allied health model of care prioritizing patient choice and group-based interventions provides modest benefits for tertiary-referral chronic pain patients. TAP warrants further investigation as a potentially viable alternative for tertiary healthcare where traditional pain services are unavailable or have long waiting lists. SIGNIFICANCE: The study tests effectiveness and safety of an expanded scope allied health-led chronic pain program. Despite a high attrition rate, the study showed reduced pain interference and increased physical function in those who completed the protocol. The results are promising and support introduction of this model as an adjunct to existing traditional chronic pain models of care, with a particular focus on improving participant retention in the program. Additionally, the model of care can be used as a standalone chronic pain model of care where no other pain management resources are available. The study was registered on ANZCTR (Trial ID: ACTRN12617001284358).
