Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Use of a goal setting intervention to increase adherence to low back pain rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial [with consumer summary]
Coppack RJ, Kristensen J, Karageorghis CI
Clinical Rehabilitation 2012 Nov;26(11):1032-1042
clinical trial
7/10 [Eligibility criteria: No; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of a goal setting intervention on self-efficacy, treatment efficacy, adherence and treatment outcome in patients undergoing low back pain rehabilitation. DESIGN: A mixed-model 2 (time) x 3 (group) randomized controlled trial. SETTING: A residential rehabilitation centre for military personnel. SUBJECTS: UK military personnel volunteers (n = 48); mean age was 32.9 (SD 7.9) with a diagnosis of non-specific low back pain. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects were randomly assigned to either a goal setting experimental group (Exp, n = 16), therapist-led exercise therapy group (C1, n = 16) or non-therapist-led exercise therapy group (C2, n = 16). Treatment duration for all groups was three weeks. MAIN MEASURES: Self-efficacy, treatment efficacy and treatment outcome were recorded before and after the treatment period. Adherence was rated during regularly scheduled treatment sessions using the Sports Injury Rehabilitation Adherence Scale (SIRAS). The Biering-Sorensen test was used as the primary measure of treatment outcome. RESULTS: ANCOVA results showed that adherence scores were significantly higher in the experimental group (13.70 +/- 1.58) compared with C2 (11.74 +/- 1.35) (p < 0.025). There was no significant difference for adherence between the experimental group and C1 (p = 0.13). Self-efficacy was significantly higher in the experimental group compared to both C1 and C2 (p < 0.05), whereas no significant difference was found for treatment efficacy. Treatment outcome did not differ significantly between the experimental and two control groups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide partial support for the use of goal setting to enhance adherence in clinical rehabilitation.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help