Dataset Information

Effect of a Consumer-Focused Website for Low Back Pain on Health Literacy, Treatment Choices, and Clinical Outcomes: Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The internet is used for information related to health conditions, including low back pain (LBP), but most LBP websites provide inaccurate information. Few studies have investigated the effectiveness of internet resources in changing health literacy or treatment choices.

Objective

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the MyBackPain website compared with unguided internet use on health literacy, choice of treatments, and clinical outcomes in people with LBP.

Methods

This was a pragmatic, web-based, participant- and assessor-blinded randomized trial of individuals with LBP stratified by duration. Participants were randomly allocated to have access to the evidence-based MyBackPain website, which was designed with input from consumers and expert consensus or unguided internet use. The coprimary outcomes were two dimensions of the Health Literacy Questionnaire (dimension 2: "having sufficient information to manage my health;" dimension 3: "actively managing my health;" converted to scores 1-100) at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included additional Health Literacy Questionnaire dimensions, quality of treatment choices, and clinical outcomes.

Results

A total of 453 participants were recruited, and 321 (70.9%) completed the primary outcomes. Access to MyBackPain was not superior to unguided internet use on primary outcomes (dimension 2: mean difference -0.87 units, 95% CI -3.56 to 1.82; dimension 3: mean difference -0.41 units, 95% CI -2.78 to 1.96). Between-group differences in other secondary outcomes had inconsistent directions and were unlikely to be clinically important, although a small improvement of unclear importance in the quality of stated treatment choices at 1 month was found (mean difference 0.93 units, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.84).

Conclusions

MyBackPain was not superior to unguided internet use for health literacy, but data suggest some short-term improvement in treatment choices. Future research should investigate if greater interactivity and engagement with the website may enhance its impact.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12617001292369; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=372926.

International registered report identifier (irrid)

RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027516.

SUBMITTER: Hodges PW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8277358 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThis cluster-randomised controlled trial determined the effectiveness of an evidence-based, pamphlet intervention in improving low back pain (LBP)-related beliefs among pharmacy consumers.MethodsTHIRTY FIVE COMMUNITY PHARMACIES WERE RANDOMISED TO THREE GROUPS: pamphlet+education intervention [n = 11]; pamphlet only intervention [n = 11]; control: usual care [n = 13]. Eligibility requirements for clusters included: community-based pharmacies and proprietor participation consent. Pharmacy consumers (N = 317) aged 18-65 years currently experiencing LBP participated. Intervention group allocation depended on the pharmacy attended. Individual-level outcomes were measured at pre-intervention (T0), at two (T1) and eight (T2) weeks post-intervention and included beliefs about LBP [Back Pain Beliefs Questionnaire (BBQ); Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ)]. Secondary outcomes included pain severity, activity impairment and pamphlet perceived usefulness. Blinding to group allocation included primary investigators, outcome assessors and the statistician. Pharmacy staff and consumers were un-blinded.ResultsOf 35 pharmacies recruited (317 consumers), no clusters were lost to follow-up. Follow-up was available for n = 24 at 2 weeks only; n = 38 at 8 weeks only; n = 148 at both time points, with n = 148+24+38 = 210 analysed (107 excluded: no follow up). Adjusting for baseline scores demonstrated no significant differences in beliefs (2 or at 8 weeks) between pamphlet (with or without education) versus control, or between 'pamphlet with' versus 'without' education. Work-related fear (FABQ) was significantly lower in consumers receiving pamphlet (with or without education) versus control (difference -2.3, 95%CI: -4.4 to -0.2). There was no significant difference between "pamphlet with" versus "pamphlet without" groups. Consumers receiving the "pamphlet with" reported greater perceived usefulness than consumers receiving the "pamphlet without" (difference 0.9 (95%CI: 0.0 to 1.8)).ConclusionCommunity pharmacies provided a feasible primary care portal for implementing evidence-based information. The associated improvement in work-related LBP-beliefs for consumers receiving the pamphlet suggests this simple intervention may be a useful component of care.Trial registrationACTR.org.au ACTRN12611000053921.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Low back pain (LBP) is the most common musculoskeletal disorder and a leading cause of disability worldwide. It impacts daily life and work capacity and is the most common reason for consulting a general practitioner (GP). According to international guidelines, information, reassurance, and advice are key components in the management of people with LBP; however, the consultation time available in general practice for each patient is often limited. Therefore, new methods to support the delivery of information and advice are needed and online technologies provide new opportunities to extend the consultation beyond the GP's office. However, it is not known whether GPs and people consulting their GP because of LBP will accept online technologies as part of the consultation. By involving patients in the development of online information, we may produce more user-friendly content and design, and improve patient acceptance and usage, optimising satisfaction and clinical outcomes. The purpose is to study satisfaction in people consulting their GP with LBP depending on whether they are randomised to receive supporting information through a new participant-driven web application or a standard reference website containing guideline-based information on LBP. It is hypothesised that patients offered information in a new web application will be more satisfied with the online information after 12 weeks compared to patients allocated to a standard website. METHODS:Two hundred patients with LBP aged ? 18 years consulting Danish general practice will be randomly allocated 1:1 to either the new web application or standard online information in permuted blocks of two, four, and six. Patients with serious spinal diseases (cancer, fractures, spinal stenosis, spondyloarthritis), those without Danish reading skills or without online access, and pregnant women will not be included in the trial. Patient satisfaction measured by the Net Promotor Score after 12 weeks is the primary outcome. Patients will be aware of their allocation. GPs will be blinded unless informed by the patient. Assessors are blinded. DISCUSSION:To our knowledge, this is the first trial evaluating whether involving LBP patients in the development of an online web application will result in higher patient satisfaction. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03088774 . Registered on 23 March 2017. Last updated on 14 March 2018.