Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37688496›Full record

Trial reportMusculoskeletal care2023

The acceptability and feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness of a walking intervention for older people with persistent musculoskeletal pain in primary care: A mixed methods evaluation of the iPOPP pilot trial.

Emma L Healey, John McBeth, Elaine Nicholls, Carolyn A Chew-Graham, Stephen Dent, Nadine E Foster, Daniel Herron, Tamar Pincus, Liz Hartshorne, Elaine M Hay and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Musculoskeletal care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Emma L HealeySchool of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8356-0825
John McBethArthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Elaine NichollsSchool of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.
Carolyn A Chew-GrahamSchool of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.
Stephen DentSchool of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.
Nadine E FosterSchool of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.
Daniel HerronSchool of Health, Science and Wellbeing, Staffordshire University, Science Centre Building, Stoke-on-Trent, UK.
Tamar PincusThe Faculty for Environment and Life Sciences (FELS), University of Southampton, University Road, Southampton, UK.
Liz HartshorneFaculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Elaine M HaySchool of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.
Clare JinksSchool of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.
Keele University · GBMidlands Partnership NHS Foundation Trust · GBThe University of Queensland · AUUniversity of Manchester · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GBUniversity of Southampton · GBUniversity of Staffordshire · GB

Funding

Versus Arthritis
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPersistent musculoskeletal (MSK) pain is associated with physical inactivity in older people. While walking is an acceptable form of physical activity, the effectiveness of walking interventions in this population has yet to be established.

objectivesTo assess the acceptability and feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the effectiveness of a healthcare assistant-led walking intervention for older people with persistent MSK pain (iPOPP) in primary care.

methodsA mixed method, three arm pilot RCT was conducted in four general practices and recruited patients aged ≥65 years with persistent MSK pain. Participants were randomised in a 1:1:1 ratio to: (i) usual care, (ii) usual care plus a pedometer intervention, or (iii) usual care plus the iPOPP walking intervention. Descriptive statistics were used in an exploratory analysis of the quantitative data. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis. A triangulation protocol was used to integrate the analyses from the mixed methods.

resultsAll pre-specified success criteria were achieved in terms of feasibility (recruitment, follow-up and iPOPP intervention adherence) and acceptability. Triangulation of the data identified the need, in the future, to make the iPOPP training (for intervention deliverers) more patient-centred to better support already active patients and the use of individualised goal setting and improve accelerometry data collection processes to increase the amount of valid data.

conclusionsThis pilot trial suggests that the iPOPP intervention and a future full-scale RCT are both acceptable and feasible. The use of a triangulation protocol enabled more robust conclusions about acceptability and feasibility to be drawn.

Indexed as

Musculoskeletal PainAgedFeasibility StudiesHumansPilot ProjectsPrimary Health CareWalkingdata triangulationmusculoskeletal painolder peoplephysical activityprimary carerandomised controlled trialwalking

Identifiers

PMID37688496
PMCPMC10946998
OpenAlexW4386574680

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.