Optimizing Management of Low Back Pain Through the Pain and Disability Drivers Management Model

March 23, 2020 updated by: Université de Sherbrooke

Optimizing Management of Low Back Pain Through the Pain and Disability Drivers Management Model: Study Protocol for a Feasibility Trial

This study aims to determine the feasibility of conducting a future randomized controlled trial to collect preliminary data on the effectiveness of a previously validated approach that takes into account all the pain and disability vectors associated with low back pain - the Pain and Disability Drivers Management Model (PDDM).

The overall objective is to provide data to assess the feasibility of implementing a future randomized clinical trial to evaluate the impact of the PDDM on the management of non-specific LBP in a clinical setting and to explore the short-term effect of using the model on patient's clinical outcomes.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Background: Non-specific mechanical low back pain (LBP) is highly prevalent, recurrent and is a leading cause of disability worldwide. Despite increased efforts in improving care, the self-reported levels of disability in individuals with LBP have not improved in the last decade. In order to more effectively manage LBP through non-pharmacological approaches, evidence endorses the use of classification systems to support diagnosis and guide treatments. However, this approach to care is not without limitations and a more comprehensive and broader perspective is needed. Hence, we recently proposed and validated the Low Back Pain and Disability Drivers Management (PDDM) model, which aims to identify the domains influencing pain and disability to create a profile or phenotype to guide clinical decisions. The objective of this study is to assess the feasibility of conducting a trial and to gather preliminary effect outcomes of the intervention in clinical setting.

Methods: The design is a prospective single arm experimental design. Physiotherapists (PTs) working with a population suffering from musculoskeletal disorders and patients presenting with non-specific mechanical LBP from two different clinical settings will be recruited. The intervention consists of a one-day training workshop for PTs on using the PDDM to guide management decisions. PTs will then perform a 6-weeks follow-up with their participating patients. This feasibility study will assess recruitment and retention rates as well as PTs' acceptability and patients' satisfaction outcomes related to the intervention. Preliminary effect outcomes will also be gathered.

Discussion: This study will inform the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and gather preliminary outcomes to conduct a future randomized controlled trial to measure the effectiveness of the intervention in managing non-specific mechanical LBP.

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

86

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Quebec
      • Montréal, Quebec, Canada, H2B 1J9
        • Réseau de clinique PhysioExtra
      • Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada, J1H 5H3
        • CIUSSS de l'Estrie - CHUS

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Patients:

  • Patients presenting with non-specific LBP according to the assessment conducted by the PT

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

Clinicians:

  • be working with a population suffering from musculoskeletal disorders such as LBP and have a valid license to practice physiotherapy in the province of Quebec
  • agree to participate to the one-day training workshop (intervention)
  • assess and initiate treatment of their patients presenting with non-specific LBP guided by our newly developed model

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Observational Models: Ecologic or Community
  • Time Perspectives: Prospective

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
Intervention / Treatment
Pain and Disability Drivers Management model
Participating clinicians will use the PDDM model to guide assessment and treatment of their patients for a 6-weeks period.
The Low Back Pain and Disability Drivers Management (PDDM) model aims to identify the domains influencing pain and disability to guide clinical decisions. The model is composed of five domains upon which the clinician can base his assessment and orientate treatment allocation and includes: 1) nociceptive pain drivers (i.e., somatic, inflammatory or mixed pain), 2) nervous system dysfunction (NSD) drivers (i.e., sensitization of the peripheral and/or central nervous system), 3) comorbidity drivers (i.e., physical and/or mental health comorbidities), 4) cognitive-emotional drivers (i.e., maladaptive cognitions and/or behaviors) and 5) contextual drivers (i.e., occupational-related and social environmental contextual drivers). This profiling will inform and lead the clinician's treatment approach based on the combined contribution of each domain driving the experience of pain and disability.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Feasibility of implementation
Time Frame: T1: clinician's baseline.
Recruitment rate: % of eligible clinicians who enrolled in the study (T1)
T1: clinician's baseline.
Feasibility of implementation
Time Frame: T1: clinician's baseline; T3 (6 weeks)
Retention rate: % of contacted clinicians who accepted to participate and report data (T3-T1)
T1: clinician's baseline; T3 (6 weeks)
Clinician's acceptability of the workshop
Time Frame: T1: clinician's baseline (after the workshop)
Assessed via semi-structured phone interviews. It includes the clinician's appreciation of the training.
T1: clinician's baseline (after the workshop)
Clinician's acceptability of the intervention
Time Frame: T3 (6 weeks)
Assessed via semi-structured phone interviews and include clinician's perception of suitability of the assessment procedures to refine the diagnosis and to target adequate treatment.
T3 (6 weeks)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Nociceptive pain drivers : Change in Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) scores at 6 weeks
Time Frame: At T2: patient initial visit; T3: +6 weeks after initial visit
Change in BPI scores measured at T2 and T3 (T3-T2)
At T2: patient initial visit; T3: +6 weeks after initial visit
Nervous system dysfunction drivers: Change in Pain Detect Questionnaire scores at 6 weeks
Time Frame: At T2: patient initial visit; T3: +6 weeks after initial visit
Change in Pain Detect Questionnaire scores measured at T2 and T3 (T3-T2)
At T2: patient initial visit; T3: +6 weeks after initial visit
Nervous system dysfunction drivers: Change in Central Sensitization Index (CSI) scores at 6 weeks
Time Frame: At T2: patient initial visit; T3: +6 weeks after initial visit
Change in CSI scores measured at T2 and T3 (T3-T2)
At T2: patient initial visit; T3: +6 weeks after initial visit
Cognitive-emotional drivers: Change in StartBackTool (SBT) scores at 6 weeks
Time Frame: At T2: patient initial visit; T3: +6 weeks after initial visit
Change in SBT scores measured at T2 and T3 (T3-T2)
At T2: patient initial visit; T3: +6 weeks after initial visit
Contextual drivers: Change in Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire (OMPSQ) scores at 6 weeks
Time Frame: At T2: patient initial visit; T3: +6 weeks after initial visit
Change in OMPSQ scores measured at T2 and T3 (T3-T2)
At T2: patient initial visit; T3: +6 weeks after initial visit

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme, PhD, School of Rehabilitation, University of Sherbrooke

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

May 3, 2019

Primary Completion (Actual)

December 15, 2019

Study Completion (Actual)

December 15, 2019

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 29, 2019

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 10, 2019

First Posted (Actual)

May 14, 2019

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

March 24, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 23, 2020

Last Verified

March 1, 2020

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • MP-31-2019-3131

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe