Cargando…

Using mixed methods evaluation to assess the feasibility of online clinical training in evidence based interventions: a case study of cognitive behavioural treatment for low back pain

BACKGROUND: Cognitive behavioural (CB) approaches are effective in the management of non-specific low back pain (LBP). We developed the CB Back Skills Training programme (BeST) and previously provided evidence of clinical and cost effectiveness in a large pragmatic trial. However, practice change is...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Richmond, Helen, Hall, Amanda M., Hansen, Zara, Williamson, Esther, Davies, David, Lamb, Sarah E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4912756/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27316705
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0683-4
_version_ 1782438319277211648
author Richmond, Helen
Hall, Amanda M.
Hansen, Zara
Williamson, Esther
Davies, David
Lamb, Sarah E.
author_facet Richmond, Helen
Hall, Amanda M.
Hansen, Zara
Williamson, Esther
Davies, David
Lamb, Sarah E.
author_sort Richmond, Helen
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cognitive behavioural (CB) approaches are effective in the management of non-specific low back pain (LBP). We developed the CB Back Skills Training programme (BeST) and previously provided evidence of clinical and cost effectiveness in a large pragmatic trial. However, practice change is challenged by a lack of treatment guidance and training for clinicians. We aimed to explore the feasibility and acceptability of an online programme (iBeST) for providing training in a CB approach. METHODS: This mixed methods study comprised an individually randomised controlled trial of 35 physiotherapists and an interview study of 8 physiotherapists. Participants were recruited from 8 National Health Service departments in England and allocated by a computer generated randomisation list to receive iBeST (n = 16) or a face-to-face workshop (n = 19). Knowledge (of a CB approach), clinical skills (unblinded assessment of CB skills in practice), self-efficacy (reported confidence in using new skills), attitudes (towards LBP management), and satisfaction were assessed after training. Engagement with iBeST was assessed with user analytics. Interviews explored acceptability and experiences with iBeST. Data sets were analysed independently and jointly interpreted. RESULTS: Fifteen (94 %) participants in the iBeST group and 16 (84 %) participants in the workshop group provided data immediately after training. We observed similar scores on knowledge (MD (95 % CI): 0.97 (−1.33, 3.26)), and self-efficacy to deliver the majority of the programme (MD (95 % CI) 0.25 (−1.7; 0.7)). However, the workshop group showed greater reduction in biomedical attitudes to LBP management (MD (95 % CI): −7.43 (−10.97, −3.89)). Clinical skills were assessed in 5 (33 %) iBeST participants and 7 (38 %) workshop participants within 6 months of training and were similar between groups (MD (95 % CI): 0.17(−0.2; 0.54)). Interviews highlighted that while initially sceptical, participants found iBeST acceptable. A number of strategies were identified to enhance future versions of iBeST such as including more skills practice. CONCLUSIONS: Combined quantitative and qualitative data indicated that online training was an acceptable and promising method for providing training in an evidence based complex intervention. With future enhancement, the potential reach of this training method may facilitate evidence-based practice through large scale upskilling of the workforce. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN82203145 (registered prospectively on 03.09.2012). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0683-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4912756
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49127562016-06-19 Using mixed methods evaluation to assess the feasibility of online clinical training in evidence based interventions: a case study of cognitive behavioural treatment for low back pain Richmond, Helen Hall, Amanda M. Hansen, Zara Williamson, Esther Davies, David Lamb, Sarah E. BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Cognitive behavioural (CB) approaches are effective in the management of non-specific low back pain (LBP). We developed the CB Back Skills Training programme (BeST) and previously provided evidence of clinical and cost effectiveness in a large pragmatic trial. However, practice change is challenged by a lack of treatment guidance and training for clinicians. We aimed to explore the feasibility and acceptability of an online programme (iBeST) for providing training in a CB approach. METHODS: This mixed methods study comprised an individually randomised controlled trial of 35 physiotherapists and an interview study of 8 physiotherapists. Participants were recruited from 8 National Health Service departments in England and allocated by a computer generated randomisation list to receive iBeST (n = 16) or a face-to-face workshop (n = 19). Knowledge (of a CB approach), clinical skills (unblinded assessment of CB skills in practice), self-efficacy (reported confidence in using new skills), attitudes (towards LBP management), and satisfaction were assessed after training. Engagement with iBeST was assessed with user analytics. Interviews explored acceptability and experiences with iBeST. Data sets were analysed independently and jointly interpreted. RESULTS: Fifteen (94 %) participants in the iBeST group and 16 (84 %) participants in the workshop group provided data immediately after training. We observed similar scores on knowledge (MD (95 % CI): 0.97 (−1.33, 3.26)), and self-efficacy to deliver the majority of the programme (MD (95 % CI) 0.25 (−1.7; 0.7)). However, the workshop group showed greater reduction in biomedical attitudes to LBP management (MD (95 % CI): −7.43 (−10.97, −3.89)). Clinical skills were assessed in 5 (33 %) iBeST participants and 7 (38 %) workshop participants within 6 months of training and were similar between groups (MD (95 % CI): 0.17(−0.2; 0.54)). Interviews highlighted that while initially sceptical, participants found iBeST acceptable. A number of strategies were identified to enhance future versions of iBeST such as including more skills practice. CONCLUSIONS: Combined quantitative and qualitative data indicated that online training was an acceptable and promising method for providing training in an evidence based complex intervention. With future enhancement, the potential reach of this training method may facilitate evidence-based practice through large scale upskilling of the workforce. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN82203145 (registered prospectively on 03.09.2012). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0683-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-06-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4912756/ /pubmed/27316705 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0683-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Richmond, Helen
Hall, Amanda M.
Hansen, Zara
Williamson, Esther
Davies, David
Lamb, Sarah E.
Using mixed methods evaluation to assess the feasibility of online clinical training in evidence based interventions: a case study of cognitive behavioural treatment for low back pain
title Using mixed methods evaluation to assess the feasibility of online clinical training in evidence based interventions: a case study of cognitive behavioural treatment for low back pain
title_full Using mixed methods evaluation to assess the feasibility of online clinical training in evidence based interventions: a case study of cognitive behavioural treatment for low back pain
title_fullStr Using mixed methods evaluation to assess the feasibility of online clinical training in evidence based interventions: a case study of cognitive behavioural treatment for low back pain
title_full_unstemmed Using mixed methods evaluation to assess the feasibility of online clinical training in evidence based interventions: a case study of cognitive behavioural treatment for low back pain
title_short Using mixed methods evaluation to assess the feasibility of online clinical training in evidence based interventions: a case study of cognitive behavioural treatment for low back pain
title_sort using mixed methods evaluation to assess the feasibility of online clinical training in evidence based interventions: a case study of cognitive behavioural treatment for low back pain
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4912756/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27316705
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0683-4
work_keys_str_mv AT richmondhelen usingmixedmethodsevaluationtoassessthefeasibilityofonlineclinicaltraininginevidencebasedinterventionsacasestudyofcognitivebehaviouraltreatmentforlowbackpain
AT hallamandam usingmixedmethodsevaluationtoassessthefeasibilityofonlineclinicaltraininginevidencebasedinterventionsacasestudyofcognitivebehaviouraltreatmentforlowbackpain
AT hansenzara usingmixedmethodsevaluationtoassessthefeasibilityofonlineclinicaltraininginevidencebasedinterventionsacasestudyofcognitivebehaviouraltreatmentforlowbackpain
AT williamsonesther usingmixedmethodsevaluationtoassessthefeasibilityofonlineclinicaltraininginevidencebasedinterventionsacasestudyofcognitivebehaviouraltreatmentforlowbackpain
AT daviesdavid usingmixedmethodsevaluationtoassessthefeasibilityofonlineclinicaltraininginevidencebasedinterventionsacasestudyofcognitivebehaviouraltreatmentforlowbackpain
AT lambsarahe usingmixedmethodsevaluationtoassessthefeasibilityofonlineclinicaltraininginevidencebasedinterventionsacasestudyofcognitivebehaviouraltreatmentforlowbackpain