Abstract
Objective
Interdisciplinary interventions for chronic low back pain are diverse, and there is a need to reach consensus on the content of rehabilitation.
Design
A three-round Delphi survey was conducted across international networks, a world physiotherapy specialty group, and the research team. The first round contained a checklist, based on previous research on interdisciplinary rehabilitation for people with chronic low back pain. Participants rated all items, subitems, clarifications, and questions on three content-validity indicators: (a) clarity and comprehensibility, (b) unique value, and (c) alignment with the goal. General questions were asked, together with qualitative feedback and missing items. A sensitivity analysis was conducted in anticipation of a possible overrepresentation of participants from a specific region.
Setting
Clinical practice and research.
Participants
Clinicians or researchers with knowledge and/or experience in the field of chronic low back pain and/or rehabilitation.
Main measures
Consensus scores and qualitative feedback.
Results
After three rounds, consensus was reached on all subitems. There was an overrepresentation of Belgian participants. The sensitivity analysis, removing Belgian responses, showed no or little differences in consensus scores. Consensus was reached on a comprehensive checklist comprising 11 items essential to rehabilitation for people with chronic low back pain. Additionally, 32 subitems with corresponding questions were identified, ensuring coverage of all aspects of rehabilitation for people with chronic low back pain.
Conclusion
This study developed an evidence- and consensus-based checklist for interdisciplinary rehabilitation in people with chronic low back pain. Future work should assess implementation and uptake in research and clinical practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
