Background: Patient education, home-based exercise therapy, and advice on returning to normal activities are established physiotherapeutic treatment options for patients with nonspecific low back pain (LBP). However, the effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions on health-related outcomes largely depends on patient self-management and adherence to exercise and physical activity recommendations. e-Exercise LBP is a recently developed stratified blended care intervention comprising a smartphone app integrated with face-to-face physiotherapy treatment. Following the promising effects of web-based applications on patients’ self-management skills and adherence to exercise and physical activity recommendations, it is hypothesized that e-Exercise LBP will improve patients’ physical functioning. Objective: This study aims to investigate the short-term (3 months) effectiveness of stratified blended physiotherapy (e-Exercise LBP) on physical functioning in comparison with face-to-face physiotherapy in patients with nonspecific LBP. Methods: The study design was a multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial with intention-to-treat analysis. Patients with nonspecific LBP aged ≥18 years were asked to participate in the study. The patients were treated with either stratified blended physiotherapy or face-to-face physiotherapy. Both interventions were conducted according to the Dutch physiotherapy guidelines for nonspecific LBP. Blended physiotherapy was stratified according to the patients’ risk of developing persistent LBP using the Keele STarT Back Screening Tool. The primary outcome was physical functioning (Oswestry Disability Index, range 0-100). Secondary outcomes included pain intensity, fear-avoidance beliefs, and self-reported adherence. Measurements were taken at baseline and at the 3-month follow-up. Results: Both the stratified blended physiotherapy group (104/208, 50%) and the face-to-face physiotherapy group (104/208, 50%) had improved clinically relevant and statistically significant physical functioning; however, there was no statistically significant or clinically relevant between-group difference (mean difference −1.96, 95% CI −4.47 to 0.55). For the secondary outcomes, stratified blended physiotherapy showed statistically significant between-group differences in fear-avoidance beliefs and self-reported adherence. In patients with a high risk of developing persistent LBP (13/208, 6.3%), stratified blended physiotherapy showed statistically significant between-group differences in physical functioning (mean difference −16.39, 95% CI −27.98 to −4.79) and several secondary outcomes. Conclusions: The stratified blended physiotherapy intervention e-Exercise LBP is not more effective than face-to-face physiotherapy in patients with nonspecific LBP in improving physical functioning in the short term. For both stratified blended physiotherapy and face-to-face physiotherapy, within-group improvements were clinically relevant. To be able to decide whether e-Exercise LBP should be implemented in daily physiotherapy practice, future research should focus on the long-term cost-effectiveness and determine which patients benefit most from stratified blended physiotherapy.
MULTIFILE
Background: Integrating physical therapy sessions and an online application (e-Exercise) might support people with hip osteoarthritis (OA), knee OA, or both (hip/knee OA) in taking an active role in the management of their chronic condition and may reduce the number of physical therapy sessions.Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate the short- and long-term effectiveness of e-Exercise compared to usual physical therapy in people with hip/knee OA.Design: The design was a prospective, single-blind, multicenter, superiority, cluster- randomized controlled trial.Setting: The setting included 143 primary care physical therapist practices.Participants: The participants were 208 people who had hip/knee OA and were 40 to 80 years of age.Intervention: e-Exercise is a 3-month intervention in which about 5 face-to-face physical therapy sessions were integrated with an online application consisting of graded activity, exercise, and information modules. Usual physical therapy was conducted according to the Dutch physical therapy guidelines on hip and knee OA.Measurements: Primary outcomes, measured at baseline after 3 and 12 months, were physical functioning and free-living physical activity. Secondary outcome measures were pain, tiredness, quality of life, self-efficacy, and the number of physical therapy sessions.Results: The e-Exercise group (n = 109) received, on average, 5 face-to-face sessions; the usual physical therapy group (n = 99) received 12. No significant differences in primary outcomes between the e-Exercise group and the usual physical therapy group were found. Within-group analyses for both groups showed a significant improvement in physical functioning. After 3 months, participants in the e-Exercise group reported an increase in physical activity; however, no objectively measured differences in physical activity were found. With respect to secondary outcomes, after 12 months, sedentary behavior significantly increased in the e-Exercise group compared with the usual physical therapy group. In both groups, there were significant improvements for pain, tiredness, quality of life, and self-efficacy.Limitations: The response rate at 12 months was 65%.Conclusions: The blended intervention, e-Exercise, was not more effective than usual physical therapy in people with hip/knee OA.
Background/Objectives: Homecare staff often take over activities instead of “doing activities with” clients, thereby hampering clients from remaining active in daily life. Training and supporting staff to integrate reablement into their working practices may reduce clients' sedentary behavior and improve their independence. This study evaluated the effectiveness of the “Stay Active at Home” (SAaH) reablement training program for homecare staff on older homecare clients' sedentary behavior. Design: Cluster randomized controlled trial (c-RCT). Setting: Dutch homecare (10 nursing teams comprising a total of 313 staff members). Participants: 264 clients (aged ≥65 years). Intervention: SAaH seeks to equip staff with knowledge, attitude, and skills on reablement, and to provide social and organizational support to implement reablement in homecare practice. SAaH consists of program meetings, practical assignments, and weekly newsletters over a 9-month period. The control group received no additional training and delivered care as usual. Measurements: Sedentary behavior (primary outcome) was measured using tri-axial wrist-worn accelerometers. Secondary outcomes included daily functioning (GARS), physical functioning (SPPB), psychological functioning (PHQ-9), and falls. Data were collected at baseline and at 12 months; data on falls were also collected at 6 months. Intention-to-treat analyses using mixed-effects linear and logistic regression were performed. Results: We found no statistically significant differences between the study groups for sedentary time expressed as daily minutes (adjusted mean difference: β 18.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] 22.4, 59.3), p = 0.374) and as proportion of wake/wear time (β 0.6 [95% CI 1.5, 2.6], p = 0.589) or for most secondary outcomes. Conclusion: Our c-RCT showed no evidence for the effectiveness of SAaH for all client outcomes. Refining SAaH, by adding components that intervene directly on homecare clients, may optimize the program and require further research. Additional research should explore the effectiveness of SAaH on behavioral determinants of clients and staff and cost-effectiveness.
