ReviewSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2023
[Expected areas of impact of the disciplines medicine, psychology and physiotherapy in pain treatment : A survey among members of the professions].
Review in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating relapse prophylaxis in addition to interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy for back pain: a randomised controlled trial.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment (IMPT) is an essential element in the treatment of people with chronic pain. Although IMST is defined in terms of content, it is evident that its practical design is very heterogeneous. This refers not only to the composition of the contents of the treatment but also to the concrete distribution of tasks among the professions involved. This article deals with the attribution of the effect of the activities of the three professional groups involved in IMPT: medicine, psychology and physiotherapy. The aim of this work is to examine how the professions of medicine, psychology and physiotherapy assess the effectiveness of their work and the effectiveness of the other two disciplines in the care of chronic pain patients. MATERIAL AND
methodsA newly designed questionnaire with 19 items was used. Each item describes a possible effect that treatment by the professions of medicine, psychology and physiotherapy can have. Based on factor analysis, items were combined for which the three effect attributions had the same items. The restriction to factor analysis areas was intended to avoid redundancies in the presentation and interpretation of results. The evaluation was carried out by means of a variance analysis for the impact areas with the factors "profession" and "attribution of impact".
resultsA total of 233 participants from the 3 disciplines (medicine, n = 78; psychology, n = 76; physiotherapy, n = 79) answered the questionnaire. The three areas of effect "pain reduction", "strength and movement" and "functional pain coping" could be identified by factor analysis. The impact areas attributed to the different professions are largely reflected in the participants' answers. The variance analysis revealed significant main effects for the two factors "profession" and "attribution of impact" and for their interactions.
conclusionProfessionals in medicine, psychology and physiotherapy have clear expectations of their own and the other professions mentioned here with respect to their effectiveness in certain areas of change. Overall, the three professions agree in their assessment of the contribution of medicine, psychology and physiotherapy to the areas of pain reduction, gain in strength and movement and functional pain coping.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.