File
Toye F1,2, Seers K3, Barker K1,2
1Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Physiotherapy Research Unit, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford, United Kingdom, 2University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Oxford, United Kingdom, 3University of Warwick, Warwick Research in Nursing, Warwick Medical School, Coventry, United Kingdom
Background: People with chronic pain do not always feel that they are being listened to by healthcare professionals. We aimed to further understand healthcare interactions by finding out what healthcare professionals´ feel about providing healthcare to people with chronic non-malignant pain. Qualitative evidence synthesis is a method of research that brings together published findings so that they are accessible for stakeholders.
Purpose:
1. To undertake a Qualitative evidence synthesis to increase our understanding of what it is like for healthcare professionals to provide healthcare to people with chronic non-malignant pain
2. To make our findings easily available and accessible through a short film.
Methods: We used the seven stages of meta-ethnography which involves identifying studies, extracting ideas and abstracting these ideas into a line of argument. We searched five electronic bibliographic databases and included studies that explored healthcare professionals' experience of treating patients with chronic non-malignant pain.
Results: We screened 954 abstracts and included 77 studies. We identified 6 themes:
(1) a sceptical cultural lens;
(2) navigating juxtaposed models of medicine;
(3) navigating patient-clinician borderland;
(4) challenge of dual advocacy;
(5) personal costs;
(6) the craft of pain management.
We produced a film, 'Struggling to support people to live a valued life with chronic pain' to portray our findings. This film is available on YouTube.
Conclusion(s): Healthcare professionals can find it challenging when they cannot find a diagnosis, and at times this can make them feel sceptical. Like their patients, healthcare professionals can also experience a sense of loss because they cannot solve the problem of pain. Our study shows that healthcare professionals need to negotiate a series of tensions that may be transferable to other conditions: a dualistic biomedical model versus an embodied psychosocial model; professional distance versus proximity; professional expertise versus patient empowerment; the need to make concessions to maintain therapeutic relationships versus the need for evidence based utility; patient versus healthcare system advocacy.
Implications: The innovation of this study is to synthesise studies that explore the experience of healthcare professionals, and that can help us move towards a more collaborative practice through understanding. Qualitative research films can be a useful adjunct to improving understanding. Future work to explore the usefulness of the conceptual model and film in clinical education would add value to this study. There is limited primary research that explores healthcare professionals´ experience with chronic non-malignant pain in diverse ethnic groups, gender specific contexts and in older people living in the community.
Keywords: Chronic pain, qualitative research, evidence synthesis
Funding acknowledgements: This study was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme (14/198/07)
Purpose:
1. To undertake a Qualitative evidence synthesis to increase our understanding of what it is like for healthcare professionals to provide healthcare to people with chronic non-malignant pain
2. To make our findings easily available and accessible through a short film.
Methods: We used the seven stages of meta-ethnography which involves identifying studies, extracting ideas and abstracting these ideas into a line of argument. We searched five electronic bibliographic databases and included studies that explored healthcare professionals' experience of treating patients with chronic non-malignant pain.
Results: We screened 954 abstracts and included 77 studies. We identified 6 themes:
(1) a sceptical cultural lens;
(2) navigating juxtaposed models of medicine;
(3) navigating patient-clinician borderland;
(4) challenge of dual advocacy;
(5) personal costs;
(6) the craft of pain management.
We produced a film, 'Struggling to support people to live a valued life with chronic pain' to portray our findings. This film is available on YouTube.
Conclusion(s): Healthcare professionals can find it challenging when they cannot find a diagnosis, and at times this can make them feel sceptical. Like their patients, healthcare professionals can also experience a sense of loss because they cannot solve the problem of pain. Our study shows that healthcare professionals need to negotiate a series of tensions that may be transferable to other conditions: a dualistic biomedical model versus an embodied psychosocial model; professional distance versus proximity; professional expertise versus patient empowerment; the need to make concessions to maintain therapeutic relationships versus the need for evidence based utility; patient versus healthcare system advocacy.
Implications: The innovation of this study is to synthesise studies that explore the experience of healthcare professionals, and that can help us move towards a more collaborative practice through understanding. Qualitative research films can be a useful adjunct to improving understanding. Future work to explore the usefulness of the conceptual model and film in clinical education would add value to this study. There is limited primary research that explores healthcare professionals´ experience with chronic non-malignant pain in diverse ethnic groups, gender specific contexts and in older people living in the community.
Keywords: Chronic pain, qualitative research, evidence synthesis
Funding acknowledgements: This study was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme (14/198/07)
Topic: Pain & pain management; Professional practice: other; Education
Ethics approval required: No
Institution: Not applicable
Ethics committee: Not applicable
Reason not required: This reports a evidence synthesis of qualitative research
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
