ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2025
Implementation outcomes of a biopsychosocial model pain management protocol in chronic musculoskeletal pain.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) significantly impacts physical, mental, and social well-being, necessitating an integrated biopsychosocial (BPS) approach to enhance outcomes. Despite its potential, implementation challenges persist in physiotherapy practices. This study evaluated the efficacy and implementation outcomes of a BPS-based comprehensive pain management (CPM) protocol. MATERIALS AND
methodsA prospective interventional study included 38 patients with CMP who underwent 16 structured sessions over eight weeks. Outcome measures included the Global Rate of Change (GROC) and the Short Assessment of Patient Satisfaction (SAPS). Implementation feedback was collected using the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM), and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM) after the intervention. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS v25, Armonk, Newyork, USA with significance at
resultsParticipants reported improved well-being (GROC: 3.84 ± 0.97) and high satisfaction (SAPS: 21.6 ± 2.39). Patients rated acceptance, appropriateness, and feasibility positively (
aim15.55 ± 2.27; IAM: 16.03 ± 2.16; FIM: 15.26 ± 2.26). Therapists concurred, with strong agreement across measures (mode = 4/5). No adverse effects were reported.
conclusionThe BPS-based CPM protocol effectively addresses CMP, achieving high patient satisfaction and acceptance. Its structured framework offers a promising strategy for broader clinical application. The findings align with existing evidence advocating for psychologically informed physical therapy and self-management strategies.
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.