Options
Hurley, Deirdre
Preferred name
Hurley, Deirdre
Official Name
Hurley, Deirdre
Research Output
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- PublicationPhysical Therapists’ Opinion of E-Health Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain(MDPI, 2021-02-16)
; ; ; ; (1) Background: Using new technologies to manage home exercise programmes is an approach that allows more patients to benefit from therapy. The objective of this study is to explore physical therapists’ opinions of the efficacy and disadvantages of implementing a web-based tele-rehabilitation programme for treating chronic low back pain (CLBP). (2) Methods: Nineteen physical therapists from academic and healthcare fields in both the public and private sector participated in the qualitative study. Texts extracted from a transcript of semi-structured, individual, in-depth interviews with each consenting participant were analysed to obtain the participants’ prevailing opinions. The interviews lasted approximately 40 min each. The participants’ responses were rec-orded. (3) Results: The results suggest that telerehabilitation can only be successful if patients be-come actively involved in their own treatment. However, exercise programmes for LBP are not al-ways adapted to patient preferences. New technologies allow physical therapists to provide their patients with the follow-up and remote contact they demand, but long-term adherence to treatment stems from knowledge of the exercises and the correct techniques employed by the patients them-selves. (4) Conclusions: Physical therapists treating patients with chronic non-specific low back pain believe that new technologies can provide highly effective means of reaching a greater number of patients and achieving significant savings in healthcare costs, despite the limitations of a telereha-bilitation approach in developing an appropriate and effective patient-based physiotherapy pro-gramme.15Scopus© Citations 5 - PublicationA randomized controlled trial investigating effects of an individualized pedometer driven walking program on chronic low back pain(Springer, 2021-02-19)
; ; ; ; Background: Walking is an easily prescribed physical activity for people with low back pain (LBP). However, the evidence for its effectiveness to improve pain and disability levels for people with chronic low back pain (CLBP) within a community setting has not been evaluated. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a clinician guided, pedometer-driven, walking intervention for increasing physical activity and improving clinical outcomes compared to education and advice. Methods: Randomized controlled trial recruiting N = 174 adults with CLBP. Participants were randomly allocated into either a standardized care group (SG) or pedometer based walking group (WG) using minimization allocation with a 2:1 ratio to the WG. Prior to randomization all participants were given a standard package of education and advice regarding self-management and the benefits of staying active. Following randomization the WG undertook a physiotherapist guided pedometer-driven walking program for 12 weeks. This was individually tailored by weekly negotiation of daily step targets. Main outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) recorded at baseline, 12 weeks, 6 and 12 months. Other outcomes included, numeric pain rating, International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), Back Beliefs questionnaire (BBQ), Physical Activity Self-efficacy Scale, and EQ-5D-5L quality of life estimate. Results: N = 138 (79%) participants completed all outcome measures at 12 weeks reducing to N = 96 (55%) at 12 months. Both observed and intention to treat analysis did not show any statistically significant difference in ODI change score between the WG and the SG at all post-intervention time points. There were also no significant between group differences for change scores in all secondary outcome measures. Post hoc sensitivity analyses revealed moderately disabled participants (baseline ODI ≥ 21.0) demonstrated a greater reduction in mean ODI scores at 12 months in the WG compared to SG, while WG participants with a daily baseline step count < 7500 steps demonstrated a greater reduction in mean ODI scores at 12 weeks. Conclusions: Overall, we found no significant difference in change of levels of (ODI) disability between the SG and WG following the walking intervention. However, ODI responses to a walking program for those with moderate levels of baseline disability and those with low baseline step count offer a potential future focus for continued research into the benefit of walking as a management strategy for chronic LBP.49Scopus© Citations 8 - PublicationFeasibility cluster randomised controlled trial evaluating a theory-driven group-based complex intervention versus usual physiotherapy to support self-management of osteoarthritis and low back pain (SOLAS)(BMC, 2020-09-23)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; Background: The self-management of osteoarthritis (OA) and low back pain (LBP) through activity and skills (SOLAS) theory-driven group-based complex intervention was developed primarily for the evaluation of its acceptability to patients and physiotherapists and the feasibility of trial procedures, to inform the potential for a definitive trial. Methods: This assessor-blinded multicentre two-arm parallel cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial compared the SOLAS intervention to usual individual physiotherapy (UP; pragmatic control group). Patients with OA of the hip, knee, lumbar spine and/or chronic LBP were recruited in primary care physiotherapy clinics (i.e. clusters) in Dublin, Ireland, between September 2014 and November 2015. The primary feasibility objectives were evaluated using quantitative methods and individual telephone interviews with purposive samples of participants and physiotherapists. A range of secondary outcomes were collected at baseline, 6 weeks (behaviour change only), 2 months and 6 months to explore the preliminary effects of the intervention. Analysis was by intention-to-treat according to participants' cluster allocation and involved descriptive analysis of the quantitative data and inductive thematic analysis of the qualitative interviews. A linear mixed model was used to contrast change over time in participant secondary outcomes between treatment arms, while adjusting for study waves and clusters. Results: Fourteen clusters were recruited (7 per trial arm), each cluster participated in two waves of recruitment, with the average cluster size below the target of six participants (intervention: mean (SD) = 4.92 (1.31), range 2-7; UP: mean (SD) = 5.08 (2.43), range 1-9). One hundred twenty participants (83.3% of n = 144 expected) were recruited (intervention n = 59; UP n = 61), with follow-up data obtained from 80.8% (n = 97) at 6 weeks, 84.2% (n = 101) at 2 months and 71.7% (n = 86) at 6 months. Most participants received treatment as allocated (intervention n = 49; UP n = 54). The qualitative interviews (12 participants; 10 physiotherapists (PTs) found the intervention and trial procedures acceptable and appropriate, with minimal feasible adaptations required. Linear mixed methods showed improvements in most secondary outcomes at 2 and 6 months with small between-group effects. Conclusions: While the SOLAS intervention and trial procedures were acceptable to participants and PTs, the recruitment of enough participants is the biggest obstacle to a definitive trial.19Scopus© Citations 3