Healthcare Professionals’ Perceptions of and Attitudes towards a Standardized Content Description of Interdisciplinary Rehabilitation Programs for Patients with Chronic Pain—A Qualitative Study

Douglas Anderson Åhlfeldt, Linda Vixner, Britt-Marie Stålnacke, Katja Boersma, Monika Löfgren, Marcelo Rivano Fischer and Paul Enthoven ()
Additional contact information
Douglas Anderson Åhlfeldt: Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences (HMV), Linköping University, SE-581 83 Linköping, Sweden
Linda Vixner: School of Health and Welfare, Dalarna University, SE-791 88 Falun, Sweden
Britt-Marie Stålnacke: Department of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Umeå University, SE-901 87 Umeå, Sweden
Katja Boersma: The Center for Health and Medical Psychology, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work, Örebro University, SE-701 82 Örebro, Sweden
Monika Löfgren: Division of Rehabilitation Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, SE-171 77 Stockholm, Sweden
Marcelo Rivano Fischer: Department of Health Sciences, Research Group Rehabilitation Medicine, Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden
Paul Enthoven: Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences (HMV), Linköping University, SE-581 83 Linköping, Sweden

IJERPH, 2023, vol. 20, issue 9, 1-15

Abstract: Interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation (IPR) is a recommended treatment for people with chronic pain. An inadequate description of the content of IPR programs makes it difficult to draw conclusions regarding their effects. The purpose of this study was to describe the perceptions and attitudes of healthcare professionals toward a content description of IPR programs for patients with chronic pain. Individual interviews with healthcare professionals ( n = 11) working in IPR teams in Sweden were conducted between February and May 2019. Analysis of the interviews resulted in a theme: interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation is a complex intervention, with three categories: limitations in the description of IPR programs; lack of knowledge about IPR and chronic pain; and facilitating and hindering factors for using the content description of IPR programs. Conclusion: Healthcare professionals perceived that IPR programs could be described through a general content description. A general content description could enhance the quality of IPR programs through a better understanding of their content and a comparison of different IPR programs. Healthcare professionals also expressed the importance of a content description being a guide rather than a steering document.

Keywords: interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation; content description; TIDieR checklist; healthcare professionals; complex interventions; individual interviews (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/9/5661/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/9/5661/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:9:p:5661-:d:1134062

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().