An Exploration of the Impact of Pain Education on GP Practice Staff

Overview

The aim of the research project is to quantify GP practice staffs' knowledge of chronic pain, their attitudes towards people with chronic pain and their management of a hypothetical patient with chronic pain, following a pain education session.

The study also seeks to explore GP practice staffs' experience of receiving the pain education, their understanding of pain following the education and if they perceive the education session has impacted upon their daily practice.

Full Title of Study: “An Exploration of the Impact of Pain Education on GP Practice Staff: a Mixed Methods Study”

Study Type

  • Study Type: Observational
  • Study Design
    • Time Perspective: Cross-Sectional
  • Study Primary Completion Date: December 20, 2019

Detailed Description

Inappropriate, biomedical based views of chronic pain are commonly held by health care professionals (HCPs) and these in turn can result in patients receiving sub-optimal care out of step with current guidelines (NICE, 2016). Darlow et al (2012) found that healthcare professionals management techniques did not reflect recognised treatment guidelines and this was associated with their biomedical view of chronic pain.

Pain education/training sessions for health care staff may be an important step towards improving patient care for chronic pain. Keen et al (2017) found that there was improvement in nurses' knowledge after 2 different pain education sessions delivered to nurses however there was no long term follow up. Furthermore, no studies have targeted all members of staff at a GP surgery who will interact with the patient, and thus impact upon the care they receive.

Pain Neuroscience education (PNE) is an approach to pain education which uses pain science information to shift the belief system of the receiver away from a biomedical understanding of pain to a more biopsychosocial understanding of pain.

A number of studies have shown that this education can decrease biomedical attitudes in health care students (Colleary et al. 2017; Maguire et al, 2018). Thus, it may be that this education could produce similar positive effects in GP practice staff that could have positive implications for the care of patients with chronic pain.

Thus this study aims to assess the impact on attitudes and beliefs of pain education upon staff at a GP surgery in Middlesbrough. Attitudes and beliefs will be assessed before and after the delivery of education. In addition participants will be invited to attend one of two focus groups to further discuss their findings or thoughts about the lecture.

Interventions

  • Other: Pain education
    • 70 minute lecture about chronic pain and one focus group afterwards

Arms, Groups and Cohorts

  • Clinical staff
    • All clinical staff employed at one surgery in Middlesbrough, UK who wish to participate

Clinical Trial Outcome Measures

Primary Measures

  • HC-PAIRS
    • Time Frame: 70 minutes
    • Health Care Providers Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale – assessing attitudes and beliefs towards pain using a 13 item validated questionnaire. High score is a worse outcome. Scores range from 13-91.
  • Revised pain neurophysiology quiz
    • Time Frame: 70 mins
    • Measures knowledge of pain physiology using a 12 point validated questionnaire. Low score is poor sign. Scores range from 0-12.
  • case vignette
    • Time Frame: 70 mins
    • Measures clinical practise behaviours in pain management. A validated proxy measure of clinical behaviour, MCQ weighted as appropriate or inappropriate according to current national clinical guidelines. A low score is good, and scores range from 4 to 20.
  • Interviews – qualitative assessment
    • Time Frame: 1 hour
    • Interviews to assess perception and intended application of lecture material

Participating in This Clinical Trial

Inclusion Criteria

Clinical staff at a Middlesbrough GP Surgery

Exclusion Criteria

Non-clinical staff at a Middlesbrough GP surgery and staff who are not directly employed by the Surgery.

Gender Eligibility: All

Minimum Age: 18 Years

Maximum Age: N/A

Investigator Details

  • Lead Sponsor
    • Teesside University
  • Provider of Information About this Clinical Study
    • Principal Investigator: Mrs Jagjit Mankelow, Principal Investigator – Teesside University
  • Overall Official(s)
    • J Mankelow, MSc, Principal Investigator, Teesside University

Clinical trials entries are delivered from the US National Institutes of Health and are not reviewed separately by this site. Please see the identifier information above for retrieving further details from the government database.

At TrialBulletin.com, we keep tabs on over 200,000 clinical trials in the US and abroad, using medical data supplied directly by the US National Institutes of Health. Please see the About and Contact page for details.