Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT03791164
NCT03791164UnknownNot Applicable

A Comparison of Two Different Self-management Programmes for Patients With Back Pain: A Double-blind Randomised Controlled Trial.

Teesside University1 site in 1 country200 target enrollmentStarted: January 24, 2019Last updated:
Conditions
Interventions

Trial Snapshot

Phase
Not Applicable
Enrollment
200
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
a change in the Oswestry Disability Index

Study Overview

Brief Summary

This investigation is a mixed methods research proposal to answer the question: 'Does Using the Pain Toolkit Improve Outcomes for Patients accessing the North of England Regional Back Pain Pathway?'. The study is part of a 5 year professional doctorate programme at Teesside University. The aim of the study is to test whether with a double blind randomised controlled trial patients accessing the North of England Regional Back Pain Pathway experience reduced Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) when using the pain toolkit compared to a control group of patients offered the standard treatment. The study also contains a nested qualitative element which aims to explore the participants' experiences of using the Pain Toolkit.

According to the British Pain Society (2017), chronic pain management is a significant burden to the National Health Service NHS. Back pain alone accounts for a significant disease burden and loss in productivity among working people (Al Mazroa 2013 and TUC 2008). Commissioners must justify their expenditure on health services to the local population and therefore for an area such as pain management where there is significant disease prevalence (WHO 2013) and significant costs, potential service developments should be considered. The development of the pain toolkit (Pain Toolkit 2017a) as a straightforward, easy to use self-management option offers a potentially cost effective support mechanism for patients but as yet there is no evidence to support its use in clinical practice. This study aims to fill that knowledge gap.

Detailed Description

Research Questions The overarching aim of this mixed methods study is to investigate whether the use of a structured self-management programme (the Pain Toolkit) results in better outcomes for patients with chronic back pain compared to usual care. There will be a quantitative and qualitative component to the work. In the quantitative component patients will complete outcome measure scores at baseline and then 6 and 12 months after receiving the Pain Toolkit or the standard programme for self-management. In the qualitative component a group of patients will be invited to participate in semi-structured interviews after using the Pain Toolkit. The interviews will explore their experience of using of the toolkit, its acceptability and ease of use.

The principle research question is:

  1. To investigate the effectiveness of structured self-management (the Pain Toolkit) compared to unstructured advice/information on function for patients discharged to self-management from an evidence based back pain pathway.

The secondary research question is: 2. To investigate the effectiveness of structured self-management (the Pain Toolkit) compared to unstructured self-management advice/information on pain for patients discharged to self-management from an evidence based back pain pathway. 3. To investigate the effectiveness of structured self-management (the Pain Toolkit) compared to unstructured self-management advice/information on quality of life for patients discharged to self-management from an evidence based back pain pathway 4. To investigate the effectiveness of structured self-management (the Pain Toolkit) compared to unstructured self-management advice/information on healthcare utilisation for patients discharged to self-management from an evidence based back pain pathway 5. To explore patients' experiences of using the Pain Toolkit for self-management of pain

Background There is a wealth of literature outlining the disease burden of chronic pain and in particular back pain, which forms the basis of the background to this study. Pain is widespread in the UK with almost 10 million people affected almost every day (British Pain Society 2015). More locally, for Durham Dales, Easington and Sedgefield Clinical Commissioning Group (DDES CCG) where the student researcher works, the highest cost prescribed drug is Pregabalin which is primarily used as a pain relieving medication. The CCG spends in excess of £2m per year on this one drug alone (DDES 2016). Focussing on the literature relating to back pain, the World Health Organisation state that: 'back pain is not a disease but a constellation of symptoms. In most cases, the origins remain unknown' (WHO 2013). In 2010 the Global Burden of Disease Study estimated that low back pain was among the top 10 diseases and injuries that account for the highest number of Disability Adjusted Life Years worldwide (Al Mazroa 2013). The impact of this is demonstrated in the UK, by the Trades Union Congress (TUC 2008) who reported that British businesses lose an estimated 4.9 million days per year to work related back pain, with the North East of England suffering more than most. Other authors concur that most people will experience low pain at some point in their lives (Hoy, Brooks et al 2010 p769; Yang et al 2016 p459).

Study Design

Study Type
Interventional
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention Model
Parallel
Primary Purpose
Supportive Care
Masking
Double (Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Masking Description

The investigator and the outcome assessor are blinded as to which intervention the participants have been allocated until after data collection and evaluation

Eligibility Criteria

Ages
18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Inclusion Criteria

  • •: patients with back pain who have been referred to the North of England regional back pain service who consent to take part in the study

Exclusion Criteria

  • •Exclusion criteria are patients with red flag indicators where immediate referral to secondary is indicated (NICE 2016). In addition children less than 18 years and, people who do not speak English and people with reduced mental capacity will be excluded

Arms & Interventions

Back Book

Active Comparator

Participants who are being discharged from the regional back pain pathway who are allocated 'the Back Book'. They are followed up 6 months and 1 year. This is the control group.

Intervention: the Back Book (Behavioral)

Pain Toolkit plus the Back Book

Experimental

Participants who are being discharged from the regional back pain pathway who are allocated the 'Pain Toolkit' booklet along with the control intervention 'the Back Book'. They follow the interventions in the 'PainToolkit' for 12 months and are followed up 6 months and 1 year.

Intervention: The Pain Toolkit (Behavioral)

Pain Toolkit plus the Back Book

Experimental

Participants who are being discharged from the regional back pain pathway who are allocated the 'Pain Toolkit' booklet along with the control intervention 'the Back Book'. They follow the interventions in the 'PainToolkit' for 12 months and are followed up 6 months and 1 year.

Intervention: the Back Book (Behavioral)

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

a change in the Oswestry Disability Index

Time Frame: baseline, 6 months and 1 year

the ODI is a measure of functionality

Secondary Outcomes

  • EQ-5D(baseline, 6 months and 1 year)
  • Questionnaire relating to Healthcare Usage(baseline, 6 months and 1 year)
  • Numerical pain score(baseline, 6 months and 1 year)

Investigators

Sponsor Class
Other
Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Gill Findley

Principle Investigator

Teesside University

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials