4.5 Article

BEST CANDIDATES FOR COGNITIVE TREATMENT OF ILLNESS PERCEPTIONS IN CHRONIC LOW BACK PAIN: RESULTS OF A THEORY-DRIVEN PREDICTOR STUDY

期刊

JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION MEDICINE
卷 43, 期 5, 页码 454-460

出版社

FOUNDATION REHABILITATION INFORMATION
DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0803

关键词

illness perceptions; low back pain; predictors; cognitive behavioural therapy; theory-driven approach; problem-solving

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of this study was to identify treatment-specific predictors of the effectiveness of a method of evidence-based treatment: cognitive treatment of illness perceptions. This study focuses on what treatment works for whom, whereas most prognostic studies focusing on chronic non-specific low back pain rehabilitation aim to reduce the heterogeneity of the population of patients who are suitable for rehabilitation treatment in general. Design: Three treatment-specific predictors were studied in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain receiving cognitive treatment of illness perceptions: a rational approach to problem-solving, discussion skills and verbal skills. Hierarchical linear regression analysis was used to assess their predictive value. Short-term changes in physical activity, measured with the Patient-Specific Functioning List, were the outcome measure for cognitive treatment of illness perceptions effect. Results: A total of 156 patients with chronic non-specific low back pain participated in the study. Rational problem-solving was found to be a significant predictor for the change in physical activity. Discussion skills and verbal skills were non-significant. Rational problem-solving explained 3.9% of the total variance. Conclusion: The rational problem-solving scale results are encouraging, because chronic non-specific low back pain problems are complex by nature and can be influenced by a variety of factors. A minimum score of 44 points on the rational problem-solving scale may assist clinicians in selecting the most appropriate candidates for cognitive treatment of illness perceptions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据