Patients' expectations of acute low back pain management: Implications for evidence uptake

Tammy C. Hoffmann, Chris B. Del Mar, Jenny Strong, Juliana Mai

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

29 Citations (Scopus)
46 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: In many countries, general practitioner (GP) care of acute low back pain often does not adhere to evidence-based clinical guidelines. There has been little exploration of this deviation from evidence-based care from the patients' perspective, particularly in relation to patients' care expectations. The aim of this study was to explore the care expectations in patients who present to their GP with acute low back pain, influences on expectation development, and congruence of these expectations with clinical guideline recommendations. Methods. Qualitative study in an inner urban general practice in Brisbane, Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 patients who presented to their GP with acute low back pain. Results: Patients had a biomechanical understanding of back pain, how it should be tested and treated, and a poor understanding of its natural history. Most expected x-rays, believing they were necessary to identify the "cause of the pain" without belief of any downsides to x-rays. Patients' expectations were primarily influenced by the experiences of family and friends, their own previous experiences of low back pain care, and comments from other health professionals they were consulting. The GP-patient relationship was important in influencing patient satisfaction of care provided. Most patient expectations, and some of the care that they reported receiving, were incongruent with guideline recommendations. Conclusions: A biomechanical approach to management rather than an awareness of empirical evidence was evident in patients' expectations. Communication and education by the GP that includes specifically enquiring about patients' expectations, provides an opportunity to correct misperceptions, explain acute low back pain natural history, and the rationale for test and treatment recommendations.

Original languageEnglish
Article number7
JournalBMC Family Practice
Volume14
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Pain Management
Low Back Pain
General Practitioners
Patient Care
Guidelines
Natural History
X-Rays
Back Pain
Patient Satisfaction
General Practice
Communication
Interviews
Education
Pain
Health

Cite this

@article{94973ef5d5d04c708369faa2a66cd04f,
title = "Patients' expectations of acute low back pain management: Implications for evidence uptake",
abstract = "Background: In many countries, general practitioner (GP) care of acute low back pain often does not adhere to evidence-based clinical guidelines. There has been little exploration of this deviation from evidence-based care from the patients' perspective, particularly in relation to patients' care expectations. The aim of this study was to explore the care expectations in patients who present to their GP with acute low back pain, influences on expectation development, and congruence of these expectations with clinical guideline recommendations. Methods. Qualitative study in an inner urban general practice in Brisbane, Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 patients who presented to their GP with acute low back pain. Results: Patients had a biomechanical understanding of back pain, how it should be tested and treated, and a poor understanding of its natural history. Most expected x-rays, believing they were necessary to identify the {"}cause of the pain{"} without belief of any downsides to x-rays. Patients' expectations were primarily influenced by the experiences of family and friends, their own previous experiences of low back pain care, and comments from other health professionals they were consulting. The GP-patient relationship was important in influencing patient satisfaction of care provided. Most patient expectations, and some of the care that they reported receiving, were incongruent with guideline recommendations. Conclusions: A biomechanical approach to management rather than an awareness of empirical evidence was evident in patients' expectations. Communication and education by the GP that includes specifically enquiring about patients' expectations, provides an opportunity to correct misperceptions, explain acute low back pain natural history, and the rationale for test and treatment recommendations.",
author = "Hoffmann, {Tammy C.} and {Del Mar}, {Chris B.} and Jenny Strong and Juliana Mai",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1186/1471-2296-14-7",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
journal = "BMC Family Practice",
issn = "1471-2296",
publisher = "BMC",

}

Patients' expectations of acute low back pain management : Implications for evidence uptake. / Hoffmann, Tammy C.; Del Mar, Chris B.; Strong, Jenny; Mai, Juliana.

In: BMC Family Practice, Vol. 14, 7, 2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Patients' expectations of acute low back pain management

T2 - Implications for evidence uptake

AU - Hoffmann, Tammy C.

AU - Del Mar, Chris B.

AU - Strong, Jenny

AU - Mai, Juliana

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Background: In many countries, general practitioner (GP) care of acute low back pain often does not adhere to evidence-based clinical guidelines. There has been little exploration of this deviation from evidence-based care from the patients' perspective, particularly in relation to patients' care expectations. The aim of this study was to explore the care expectations in patients who present to their GP with acute low back pain, influences on expectation development, and congruence of these expectations with clinical guideline recommendations. Methods. Qualitative study in an inner urban general practice in Brisbane, Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 patients who presented to their GP with acute low back pain. Results: Patients had a biomechanical understanding of back pain, how it should be tested and treated, and a poor understanding of its natural history. Most expected x-rays, believing they were necessary to identify the "cause of the pain" without belief of any downsides to x-rays. Patients' expectations were primarily influenced by the experiences of family and friends, their own previous experiences of low back pain care, and comments from other health professionals they were consulting. The GP-patient relationship was important in influencing patient satisfaction of care provided. Most patient expectations, and some of the care that they reported receiving, were incongruent with guideline recommendations. Conclusions: A biomechanical approach to management rather than an awareness of empirical evidence was evident in patients' expectations. Communication and education by the GP that includes specifically enquiring about patients' expectations, provides an opportunity to correct misperceptions, explain acute low back pain natural history, and the rationale for test and treatment recommendations.

AB - Background: In many countries, general practitioner (GP) care of acute low back pain often does not adhere to evidence-based clinical guidelines. There has been little exploration of this deviation from evidence-based care from the patients' perspective, particularly in relation to patients' care expectations. The aim of this study was to explore the care expectations in patients who present to their GP with acute low back pain, influences on expectation development, and congruence of these expectations with clinical guideline recommendations. Methods. Qualitative study in an inner urban general practice in Brisbane, Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 patients who presented to their GP with acute low back pain. Results: Patients had a biomechanical understanding of back pain, how it should be tested and treated, and a poor understanding of its natural history. Most expected x-rays, believing they were necessary to identify the "cause of the pain" without belief of any downsides to x-rays. Patients' expectations were primarily influenced by the experiences of family and friends, their own previous experiences of low back pain care, and comments from other health professionals they were consulting. The GP-patient relationship was important in influencing patient satisfaction of care provided. Most patient expectations, and some of the care that they reported receiving, were incongruent with guideline recommendations. Conclusions: A biomechanical approach to management rather than an awareness of empirical evidence was evident in patients' expectations. Communication and education by the GP that includes specifically enquiring about patients' expectations, provides an opportunity to correct misperceptions, explain acute low back pain natural history, and the rationale for test and treatment recommendations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84871962062&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/1471-2296-14-7

DO - 10.1186/1471-2296-14-7

M3 - Article

VL - 14

JO - BMC Family Practice

JF - BMC Family Practice

SN - 1471-2296

M1 - 7

ER -