Video analysis of communication by physiotherapists and patients in video consultations: a qualitative study using conversation analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the challenges of doing physical examinations and exercises by video, and the communication strategies used by physiotherapists and patients to overcome them. DESIGN: A qualitative study of talk and social actions, examining the verbal and non-verbal communication practices used by patients and physiotherapists. Video consultations between physiotherapists and patients were video recorded using MS Teams, transcribed and analysed in detail using Conversation Analysis. SETTING: Video consultations were recorded in three specialist settings (long-term pain, orthopaedics, and neuromuscular rehabilitation) across two NHS hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: 15 adult patients (10 female, 5 male; aged 20-77) with a scheduled video consultation. RESULTS: Examinations and exercises retain-->were successfully accomplished in all 15 consultations. Two key challenges were identified for physiotherapists and patients when doing video assessments: (1) managing safety and clinical risk, and (2) making exercises and movements visible. Challenges were addressed by through communication practices that were patient-centred and tailored to the video context (e.g., explaining how to frame the body to the camera or adjust the camera to make the body visible). CONCLUSIONS: Video is being used by physiotherapists to consult with their patients. This can work well, but tailored communication strategies are critical to help participants overcome the challenges of remote physical examinations and exercises. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PAPER: This paper is a first to use video-based analysis to determine the challenges of video consulting for doing remote assessments and exercises in physiotherapy settings. It demonstrates how patients and physiotherapists use communication strategies to raise concerns around safety and visibility and how they overcome these concerns.

Intersectionality as a theoretical framework for researching health inequities in chronic pain.

Chronic pain is experienced unequally by different population groups; we outline examples from the pain literature of inequities related to gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic and migration status. Health inequities are systematic, avoidable and unfair differences in health outcomes between groups of people, with the fundamental 'causes of causes' recognised as unequal distribution of income, power and wealth. Intersectionality can add further theory to health inequities literature; collective social identities including class/socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, gender, migration status, age, sexuality and disabled status intersect in multiple interconnected systems of power leading to differing experiences of privilege and oppression which can be understood as axes of health inequities. The process of knowledge creation in pain research is shaped by these interconnected systems of power, and may perpetuate inequities in pain care as it is largely based on majority white, middle class, Eurocentric populations. Intersectionality can inform research epistemology (ways of knowing), priorities, methodology and methods. We give examples from the literature where intersectionality has informed a justice oriented approach across different research methods and we offer suggestions for further development. The use of a reductionist frame can force unachievable objectivity on to complex health concepts, and we note increasing realisation in the field of the need to understand the individuals within their social world, and recognise the fluid and contextual nature of this.

What non-pharmacological and non-invasive pain management interventions are available for individuals from Turkish-speaking ethnic groups with non-malignant chronic pain? A scoping review of published literature.

Objectives: A scoping review was selected to explore what non-pharmacological and non-invasive pain management interventions are available for individuals from Turkish-speaking ethnic groups with chronic pain and what represents the most appropriate intervention. Inclusion Criteria: Adults with non-malignant chronic pain from Turkish-speaking ethnic groups residing in or outside of Turkey. All non-pharmacological and non-invasive pain management interventions were considered. No limits were placed on geographic location, gender, sex or healthcare setting. Methods: The MEDLINE database was searched for published literature in April 2022. An English language filter was applied. No limits were placed on study design or date of publication. Data was charted from eligible studies into a data extraction table. Key concepts were identified during data extraction by DN. Results: Eleven studies were included in the final review. All were conducted within a quantitative research paradigm. The studies were completed in Turkey (7), Belgium (1), Sweden (1) and Switzerland (1). One was a multi-country review. No studies were conducted in the UK. The primary interventions were heterogenous and included: pain science education (2), cognitive behavioural therapy (2), transcranial magnetic stimulation (1), balneotherapy (1), extracorporeal shockwave therapy (1), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (1), wool therapy (1), exercise and patient dialogues (1) and aromatherapy massage and reflexology (1). Location of pain, outcome measures and timings of follow-ups were heterogeneous. Conclusions: Intervention heterogeneity, exclusively quantitative methodology and absence of studies completed in the UK meant no conclusions could be made on what represents the most appropriate non-pharmacological and non-invasive interventions intervention for individuals from Turkish speaking ethnic groups with non-malignant chronic pain.

Inequalities and inequities in the types of chronic pain services available in areas of differing deprivation across England.

OBJECTIVES: In England, the prevalence of chronic pain is higher in more deprived compared to less deprived areas. Patients in such areas also experience more severe and disabling pain than those in less deprived areas. However, little is known about whether the distribution of services for chronic pain reflect these ranging levels of need. This study examines how the types of services available for chronic pain patients vary between healthcare providers in England, serving areas of differing deprivation. METHODS: National guidelines regarding primary as well the 8 commonest causes of secondary chronic pain (in the United Kingdom) were used to compile a list of services that have been recommended for supporting chronic pain patients. After searching the websites of 63 randomly selected National Health Service (NHS) Trusts and contacting their pain receptionists and/or secretaries, it was recorded whether the Trusts were providing each of these recommended chronic pain services. Mean Index of Multiple Deprivation 2019 scores were used to compare deprivation levels of areas covered by each NHS Trust. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the overall number of types of chronic pain services provided by NHS Trusts serving areas of differing deprivation, but deprived areas were being disadvantaged with regards to specific services. These areas were significantly (p<0.05) less likely to have occupational therapy, return-to-work programmes, and hand therapy services. Areas with fewer types of professionals (≤3) in their pain multidisciplinary team were also significantly (p<0.05) more deprived than those with more types (>3). CONCLUSION: There are significant differences in the provision of certain types of chronic pain services between areas of differing deprivation. Similar research across Europe is recommended to inform policy to combat the widespread chronic pain related health inequalities.

Pain management programmes via video conferencing: a rapid review.

OBJECTIVES: During the current COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare has been transformed by the rapid switch from in person care to use of remote consulting, including video conferencing technology. Whilst much has been published on one-to-one video consultations, little literature exists on use of this technology to facilitate group interventions. Group pain management programmes are a core treatment provided by many pain services. This rapid review aimed to identify the extent of use of video conferencing technology for delivery of group pain management programmes and provide an overview of its use. METHODS: A rapid review of the literature published up to April 2020 (PubMed, PsycINFO and PEDro) was performed. The search string consisted of three domains: pain/CP (MeSH term) AND Peer group[MeSH] AND Videoconferencing[MeSH]/Telemedicine[MeSH]/Remote Consultation[MeSH]. The studies were of poor methodological quality and study design, and interventions and chronic pain conditions were varied. RESULTS: Literature searching yielded three eligible papers for this review. All studies had low methodological quality and risk of bias. Heterogeneity and variability in outcome reporting did not allow any pooling of data. The results demonstrated that videoconferencing for delivery of group programmes is possible, yet there is little extant literature on how to develop, deliver and measure outcomes of such programmes. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates that there is little evidence to support or guide the use of synchronous videoconferencing to deliver pain management programmes. We present issues to consider, informed by this review and our experience, when implementing video conferencing. Study quality of existing work is variable, and extensive future research is necessary.

Any qualified provider: a qualitative case study of one community NHS Trust's response.

OBJECTIVE: To examine how those managing and providing community-based musculoskeletal (MSK) services have experienced recent policy allowing patients to choose any provider that meets certain quality standards from the National Health Service (NHS), private or voluntary sector. DESIGN: Intrinsic case study combining qualitative analysis of interviews and field notes. SETTING: An NHS Community Trust (the main providers of community health services in the NHS) in England, 2013-2014. PARTICIPANTS: NHS Community Trust employees involved in delivering MSK services, including clinical staff and managerial staff in senior and mid-range positions. FINDINGS: Managers (n=4) and clinicians (n=4) working within MSK services understood and experienced the Any Qualified Provider (AQP) policy as involving: (1) a perceived trade-off between quality and cost in its implementation; (2) deskilling of MSK clinicians and erosion of professional values; and (3) a shift away from interprofessional collaboration and dialogue. These ways of making sense of AQP policy were associated with dissatisfaction with market-based health reforms. CONCLUSIONS: AQP policy is poorly understood. Clinicians and managers perceive AQP as synonymous with competition and privatisation. From the perspective of clinicians providing MSK services, AQP, and related health policy reforms, tend, paradoxically, to drive down quality standards, supporting reconfiguration of services in which the complex, holistic nature of specialised MSK care may become marginalised by policy concerns about efficiency and cost. Our analysis indicates that the potential of AQP policy to increase quality of care is, at best, equivocal, and that any consideration of how AQP impacts on practice can only be understood by reference to a wider range of health policy reforms.