Objectives To identify factors associated with kinesiophobia (fear of movement) after cardiac hospitalisation and to assess the impact of kinesiophobia on cardiac rehabilitation (CR) initiation.Design Prospective cohort study.Setting Academic Medical Centre, Department of Cardiology.Participants We performed a prospective cohort study in cardiac patients recruited at hospital discharge. In total, 149 patients (78.5% male) with a median age of 65 years were included, of which 82 (59%) were referred for CR.Primary and secondary outcome measures We assessed kinesiophobia with the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK). For this study, the total score was used (range 13–52). We assessed baseline factors (demographics, cardiac disease history, questionnaire data on anxiety, biopsychosocial complexity and self-efficacy) associated with kinesiophobia using linear regression with backward elimination. For linear regression, the standardised beta (β) was reported. Prospectively, the impact of kinesiophobia on probability of CR initiation, in the first 3 months after hospital discharge (subsample referred for CR), was assessed with logistic regression. For logistic regression, the OR was reported.Results Moderate and severe levels of kinesiophobia were found in 22.8%. In the total sample, kinesiophobia was associated with cardiac anxiety (β=0.33, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.48), social complexity (β=0.23, 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.39) and higher education (β=−0.18, 95% CI: −0.34 to −0.02). In those referred for CR, kinesiophobia was negatively associated with self-efficacy (β=−0.29, 95% CI: −0.47 to −0.12) and positively with cardiac anxiety (β=0.43, 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.62). Kinesiophobia decreased the probability of CR initiation (ORRange13–52 points=0.92, 95% CI: 0.85 to 0.99).Conclusion In patients hospitalised for cardiovascular disease, kinesiophobia is associated with cardiac anxiety, social complexity, educational level and self-efficacy. Kinesiophobia decreased the likelihood of CR initiation with 8% per point on the TSK.
DOCUMENT
Background: Healthcare practitioner beliefs influence patients’ beliefs and health outcomes in musculoskeletal (MSK) pain. A validated questionnaire based on modern pain neuroscience assessing Knowledge and Attitudes ofPain (KNAP) was unavailable.Objectives: The aim of this study was to develop and test measurement properties of KNAP.Design: Phase 1; Development of KNAP reflecting modern pain neuroscience and expert opinion. Phase 2; a crosssectional and longitudinal study among Dutch physiotherapy students.Method: In the cross-sectional study (n = 424), internal consistency, structural validity, hypotheses testing, and Rasch analysis were examined. Longitudinal designs were applied to analyse test-retest reliability (n = 156), responsiveness, and interpretability (n = 76).Results: A 30-item KNAP was developed in 4 stages. Test-retest reliability: ICC (2,1) 0.80. Internal consistency: Cronbach’s α 0.80. Smallest Detectable Difference 90%: 4.99 (4.31; 5.75). Structural validity: exploratory factor analysis showed 2 factors. Hypotheses testing: associations with the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists biopsychosocial subscale r = 0.60, with biomedical subscale r = 0.58, with the Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire r = 0.52. Responsiveness: 93% improved on KNAP after studying pain education. MinimalImportant Change: 4.84 (95%CI: 2.77; 6.91).Conclusions: The KNAP has adequate measurement properties. This new questionnaire could be useful to evaluate physiotherapy students’ knowledge and attitudes of modern pain neuroscience that could help to create awareness and evaluate physiotherapy education programs, and ultimately provide better pain management.
DOCUMENT
Background: The purpose of this study was to explore physiotherapists’ knowledge, attitude, and practice behavior in assessing and managing patients with non-specific, non-traumatic, acute- and subacute neck pain, with a focus on prognostic factors for chronification. Method: A qualitative study using in-depth semi-structured interviews was conducted with 13 physiotherapists working in primary care. A purposive sampling method served to seek the broadest perspectives. The knowledgeattitude and practice framework was used as an analytic lens throughout the process. Textual data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis with an inductive approach and constant comparison. Results: Seven main themes emerged from the data; physiotherapists self-estimated knowledge and attitude, role clarity, therapeutic relationship, internal- and external barriers to practice behavior, physiotherapists’ practice behaviors, and self-reflection. These findings are presented in an adjusted knowledge-attitude and practice behavior framework. Conclusion: A complex relationship was found between a physiotherapist’s knowledge about, attitude, and practice behavior concerning the diagnostic process and interventions for non-specific, non-traumatic, acute, and subacute neck pain. Overall, physiotherapists used a biopsychosocial view of patients with non-specific neck pain. Physiotherapists’ practice behaviors was influenced by individual attitudes towards their professional role and therapeutic relationship with the patient, and individual knowledge and skills, personal routines and habits, the feeling of powerlessness to modify patients’ external factors, and patients’ lack of willingness to a biopsychosocial approach influenced physiotherapists’ clinical decisions. In addition, we found self-reflection to have an essential role in developing self-estimated knowledge and change in attitude towards their therapeutic role and therapist-patient relationship.
MULTIFILE
