↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Biopsychosocial predictors of short-term success among people with low back pain referred to a physiotherapy spinal triage service

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
154 Mendeley
Title
Biopsychosocial predictors of short-term success among people with low back pain referred to a physiotherapy spinal triage service
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, April 2015
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s81485
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brenna Bath, Stacey Lovo Grona

Abstract

A spinal triage assessment service may impact a wide range of patient outcomes. Investigating potential predictors of success or improvement may reveal why some people improve and some do not, as well as help to begin to explain potential mechanisms for improvements. The objective of this study was to determine which factors were associated with improved short-term self-reported pain, function, general health status, and satisfaction in people undergoing a spinal triage assessment performed by physiotherapists. Participants with low back-related complaints were recruited from people referred to a spinal triage assessment program (N=115). Participants completed baseline questionnaires covering a range of sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological features. Self-reported measures of pain, function, quality of life, and satisfaction were completed at 4 weeks following the assessment. Determination of "success" was based on minimal important change scores of select outcome measures. Multivariate logistic regression was used to explore potential predictors of success for each outcome. Despite the complex and chronic presentation of most participants, some reported improvements in outcomes at 4 weeks post assessment with the highest proportion of participants demonstrating improvement (according to the minimal important change scores) in the Medical Outcomes Survey 36-item short-form version 2 physical component summary score (48.6%) and the lowest proportion of participants having improvements in the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (11.5%). A variety of different sociodemographic, psychological, clinical, and other variables were associated with success or improvement in each respective outcome. There may be a potential mechanism of reassurance that occurs during the spinal triage assessment process as those with higher psychological distress (measured by the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire and the Distress and Risk Assessment Measure) were more likely to improve on certain outcomes. The use of an evaluation framework guided by a biopsychosocial model may help determine potential mechanisms of action for a physiotherapy-delivered triage program.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 151 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 33 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 14%
Student > Postgraduate 21 14%
Student > Master 20 13%
Researcher 15 10%
Other 27 18%
Unknown 16 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 69 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 43 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Sports and Recreations 5 3%
Psychology 4 3%
Other 9 6%
Unknown 18 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 June 2015.
All research outputs
#14,914,476
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#1,020
of 1,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,267
of 279,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#7
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 279,166 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.