ArticleTrials2025
Stepped rehabilitation of people with persistent shoulder pain in New Zealand (StePS-NZ): a randomised clinical trial protocol.
Article in Trials, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRotator cuff-related shoulder pain (RCRSP) is a common musculoskeletal disorder, with prevalence increasing with age. In Aotearoa New Zealand, many people with RCRSP are compelled to seek physiotherapy privately as hospital outpatient clinics have long waiting lists, or go without care. We test the efficacy of Stepped Care, a new approach to RCRSP primary care, to use resources as efficiently as possible. This study aims to (i) define the effectiveness of a Stepped Care Model for persistent RCRSP compared to usual, pragmatic physiotherapy; (ii) explore patients' and the physiotherapists' perspectives and experiences of the interventions and research processes; and (iii) compare the cost-effectiveness of the Stepped Care Model with pragmatic physiotherapy.
methodsThis pragmatic, two-armed parallel-group randomised clinical trial will enrol 200 adults with RCRSP, who are randomised to receive either Usual Physiotherapy or Stepped Care. In the Stepped Care group, all patients receive two 1-h sessions focussing on patient education. After 6 weeks, those with persistent symptoms receive pragmatic physiotherapy, while those whose symptoms have resolved will receive no further intervention. The Usual Physiotherapy group receives up to 10 sessions of pragmatic care over a 3-month period. The primary outcome is upper limb function and severity of symptoms using the QuickDASH at 3 months. Secondary outcomes includes pain severity, pain-related fear, pain self-efficacy and health-related quality of life, assessed at baseline, 6 weeks, 3, 6, and 12 months. Outcome measures in continuous scale, including QuickDASH, will be analysed to estimate the difference in the measure between two physiotherapy treatments, while the measures in categorical/binary scales will be analysed to estimate the differences of proportions with favourable outcomes. Confidence intervals will be used to make noninferiority interpretations. A cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted at the individual level and reported from a societal perspective. DISCUSSION: If the findings from this study support a stepped care approach to treatment for RCRSP, it could lead to more treatment being available at lower cost to both individuals and the health system.
trial registrationUniversal Trial Number: U1111-1298-4087. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial registration: ACTRN12624000163505, 21st February 2024.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.