(‘Co’-)Designing for healthy behaviour greatly benefits from integrating insights about individual behaviour and systemic influences. This study reports our experiences in using insights about individual and systemic determinants of behaviour to inform a large co-design project. To do so, we used two design tools that encourage focusing on individual determinants (Behavioural Lenses Approach) and social / systemic aspects of behaviour (Socionas). We performed a qualitative analysis to identify 1) when and how the team applied the design tools, and 2) how the tools supported or obstructed the design process. The results show that both tools had their distinctive uses during the process. Both tools improved the co-design process by deepening the conversations and underpinnings of the prototypes. Using the Behavioural Lenses under the guidance of a behavioural expert proved most beneficial. Furthermore, the Socionas showed the most potential when interacting with stakeholders, i.c. parents and PPTs.
MULTIFILE
Background: Development of more effective interventions for nonspecific chronic low back pain (LBP), requires a robust theoretical framework regarding mechanisms underlying the persistence of LBP. Altered movement patterns, possibly driven by pain-related cognitions, are assumed to drive pain persistence, but cogent evidence is missing. Aim: To assess variability and stability of lumbar movement patterns, during repetitive seated reaching, in people with and without LBP, and to investigate whether these movement characteristics are associated with painrelated cognitions. Methods: 60 participants were recruited, matched by age and sex (30 back-healthy and 30 with LBP). Mean age was 32.1 years (SD13.4). Mean Oswestry Disability Index-score in LBP-group was 15.7 (SD12.7). Pain-related cognitions were assessed by the ‘Pain Catastrophizing Scale’ (PCS), ‘Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale’ (PASS) and the task-specific ‘Expected Back Strain’ scale(EBS). Participants performed a seated repetitive reaching movement (45 times), at self-selected speed. Lumbar movement patterns were assessed by an optical motion capture system recording positions of cluster markers, located on the spinous processes of S1 and T8. Movement patterns were characterized by the spatial variability (meanSD) of the lumbar Euler angles: flexion-extension, lateralbending, axial-rotation, temporal variability (CyclSD) and local dynamic stability (LDE). Differences in movement patterns, between people with and without LBP and with high and low levels of pain-related cognitions, were assessed with factorial MANOVA. Results: We found no main effect of LBP on variability and stability, but there was a significant interaction effect of group and EBS. In the LBP-group, participants with high levels of EBS, showed increased MeanSDlateral-bending (p = 0.004, η2 = 0.14), indicating a large effect. MeanSDaxial-rotation approached significance (p = 0.06). Significance: In people with LBP, spatial variability was predicted by the task-specific EBS, but not by the general measures of pain-related cognitions. These results suggest that a high level of EBS is a driver of increased spatial variability, in participants with LBP.
Background: Osteoarthritis is one of the most common chronic joint diseases, mostly affecting the knee or hip through pain, joint stiffness and decreased physical functioning in daily life. Regular physical activity (PA) can help preserve and improve physical functioning and reduce pain in patients with osteoarthritis. Interventions aiming to improve movement behaviour can be optimized by tailoring them to a patients' starting point; their current movement behaviour. Movement behaviour needs to be assessed in its full complexity, and therefore a multidimensional description is needed. Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify subgroups based on movement behaviour patterns in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis who are eligible for a PA intervention. Second, differences between subgroups regarding Body Mass Index, sex, age, physical functioning, comorbidities, fatigue and pain were determined between subgroups. Methods: Baseline data of the clinical trial 'e-Exercise Osteoarthritis', collected in Dutch primary care physical therapy practices were analysed. Movement behaviour was assessed with ActiGraph GT3X and GT3X+ accelerometers. Groups with similar patterns were identified using a hierarchical cluster analysis, including six clustering variables indicating total time in and distribution of PA and sedentary behaviours. Differences in clinical characteristics between groups were assessed via Kruskall Wallis and Chi2 tests. Results: Accelerometer data, including all daily activities during 3 to 5 subsequent days, of 182 patients (average age 63 years) with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis were analysed. Four patterns were identified: inactive & sedentary, prolonged sedentary, light active and active. Physical functioning was less impaired in the group with the active pattern compared to the inactive & sedentary pattern. The group with the prolonged sedentary pattern experienced lower levels of pain and fatigue and higher levels of physical functioning compared to the light active and compared to the inactive & sedentary. Conclusions: Four subgroups with substantially different movement behaviour patterns and clinical characteristics can be identified in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and/or knee. Knowledge about these subgroups can be used to personalize future movement behaviour interventions for this population.
LINK
