The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Testing a model of consultation-based reassurance and back pain outcomes with psychological risk as moderator: A prospective cohort study

Testing a model of consultation-based reassurance and back pain outcomes with psychological risk as moderator: A prospective cohort study
Testing a model of consultation-based reassurance and back pain outcomes with psychological risk as moderator: A prospective cohort study
Objectives: Reassurance is an essential part of treatment for low back pain (LBP), but evidence on effective methods to deliver reassurance remains scarce. The interaction between consultation-based reassurance and patients' psychological risk is unknown. Our objective was to investigate the relationship between consultation-based reassurance and clinical outcomes at follow up, in people with and without psychological risk.Methods: We tested the associations between specific reassurance components (data gathering; relationship building, generic reassurance and cognitive reassurance), patients' psychological risk (the presence of depression, anxiety, catastrophizing or fear-avoidance), and post-consultation outcomes including; satisfaction and enablement, disability, pain and mood at 3-month follow-up.Results: Adjusted linear regression models using data from patients who had recently consulted for LBP in primary care (n=142 in 43 practices) indicated that all reassurance components were strongly associated with increased satisfaction, while generic reassurance was significantly associated with post-consultation enablement. Generic reassurance was also associated with lower pain at three months, while cognitive reassurance was associated with increased pain. A significant interaction was observed between generic reassurance and psychological risk for depression at three-months: high rates of generic reassurance were associated with lower depression in low risk patients, but with higher rates of depression for high risk groups.Discussion: The findings support the hypothesis that different components of reassurance are associated with specific outcomes, and that psychological risk moderates this relationship for depression. Doctors' reassuring behaviours might therefore have the potential to improve outcomes in people with LBP, especially for patients with higher psychological risk profiles.
0749-8047
339-348
Holt, Nicola
e5cfda65-14d4-4773-bf4a-cf96f00bb5e6
Mansell, Gemma
be6d92d7-996f-49a2-b598-d3be41a1b6d5
Hill, Jonathan
8e544af1-9ac0-46d3-9821-2c0014a61a85
Pincus, Tamar
55388347-5d71-4fc0-9fd2-66fbba080e0c
Holt, Nicola
e5cfda65-14d4-4773-bf4a-cf96f00bb5e6
Mansell, Gemma
be6d92d7-996f-49a2-b598-d3be41a1b6d5
Hill, Jonathan
8e544af1-9ac0-46d3-9821-2c0014a61a85
Pincus, Tamar
55388347-5d71-4fc0-9fd2-66fbba080e0c

Holt, Nicola, Mansell, Gemma, Hill, Jonathan and Pincus, Tamar (2018) Testing a model of consultation-based reassurance and back pain outcomes with psychological risk as moderator: A prospective cohort study. Clinical Journal of Pain, 34 (4), 339-348. (doi:10.1097/AJP.0000000000000541).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Objectives: Reassurance is an essential part of treatment for low back pain (LBP), but evidence on effective methods to deliver reassurance remains scarce. The interaction between consultation-based reassurance and patients' psychological risk is unknown. Our objective was to investigate the relationship between consultation-based reassurance and clinical outcomes at follow up, in people with and without psychological risk.Methods: We tested the associations between specific reassurance components (data gathering; relationship building, generic reassurance and cognitive reassurance), patients' psychological risk (the presence of depression, anxiety, catastrophizing or fear-avoidance), and post-consultation outcomes including; satisfaction and enablement, disability, pain and mood at 3-month follow-up.Results: Adjusted linear regression models using data from patients who had recently consulted for LBP in primary care (n=142 in 43 practices) indicated that all reassurance components were strongly associated with increased satisfaction, while generic reassurance was significantly associated with post-consultation enablement. Generic reassurance was also associated with lower pain at three months, while cognitive reassurance was associated with increased pain. A significant interaction was observed between generic reassurance and psychological risk for depression at three-months: high rates of generic reassurance were associated with lower depression in low risk patients, but with higher rates of depression for high risk groups.Discussion: The findings support the hypothesis that different components of reassurance are associated with specific outcomes, and that psychological risk moderates this relationship for depression. Doctors' reassuring behaviours might therefore have the potential to improve outcomes in people with LBP, especially for patients with higher psychological risk profiles.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 1 April 2018
Additional Information: Copyright © 2018, Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 469395
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/469395
ISSN: 0749-8047
PURE UUID: 49ff17c6-ffce-4285-b197-2a7c70bd742a
ORCID for Tamar Pincus: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-3172-5624

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 14 Sep 2022 16:42
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 04:11

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Nicola Holt
Author: Gemma Mansell
Author: Jonathan Hill
Author: Tamar Pincus ORCID iD

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×