Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Moderately vigorous physical activity (PA) may be beneficial for people with sub-acute low back pain (LBP), but may initially be painful for patients and challenging for physical therapists to facilitate.
Objectives: This study investigated motivational interviewing (MI) delivered by physical therapists and a smartphone app for increasing PA in people with LBP.
Methods: A mixed methods cluster randomised controlled trial involving 46 adults with LBP in Melbourne, Australia. Participants attended weekly 30-min physical therapy consultations for 6 weeks. Experimental group physical therapists were taught to embed MI into consultations and patients were provided with a self-directed app. The primary outcome was accelerometer-derived moderately vigorous PA. Secondary outcomes were LBP disability (Oswestry Disability Index), functional capacity (Patient Specific Functional Scale), and self-efficacy (Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire). Between-group differences were analysed by ANCOVA post-intervention.
Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the experimental group and control group for PA. Between-group differences in LBP disability (MD= 19.4 units, 95% CI: 8.5, 30.3), functional capacity (primary MD= -4.1 units, 95% CI: -6.9, -1.3; average MD= -3.1, 95% CI: -4.9, -1.2) and self-efficacy (MD -11.3 units, 95%CI -20.2, -2.5) favoured the control group with small to moderate effect sizes. There were low levels of overall engagement with the app.
Conclusion: The embedded MI intervention was no more beneficial than physical therapy alone for PA and was associated with poorer LBP disability, function, and self-efficacy. The effectiveness of embedding MI and a smartphone app into usual care for LBP was not supported.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11260563 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjpt.2024.101091 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!