↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative study of professional stakeholders’ perceptions about the implementation of a stepped care pain platform for people experiencing chronic widespread pain

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A qualitative study of professional stakeholders’ perceptions about the implementation of a stepped care pain platform for people experiencing chronic widespread pain
Published in
BMC Primary Care, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12875-018-0838-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Judith Gellatly, Gosia Pelikan, Paul Wilson, Kate Woodward-Nutt, Michael Spence, Anthony Jones, Karina Lovell

Abstract

Chronic widespread pain (CWP) is a major public health problem. Many people experiencing CWP experience mental health problems such as anxiety or depression. Complete relief of skeletal and body pain symptoms is unlikely but with appropriate treatment the impact upon quality of life, functioning and mental health symptoms can be reduced. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is widely used for a range of health conditions and can have short and long-term improvements in patients with CWP. This research aimed to explore, from a professional stakeholder perspective, the implementation of a local Pain Platform offering a stepped care approach for interventions including telephone delivered CBT (T-CBT). Fourteen professional stakeholders holding various roles across primary and secondary care services within the Pain Platform took part in semi-structured interviews. Their views and experiences of the implementation of the Pain Platform were explored. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed according to Normalisation Process Theory (NPT). Professional stakeholders were positive about the Pain Platform and its potential to overcome previously identified existing access issues to psychological interventions for CWP patients. It was considered a valuable part of ensuring that patients' preferences and needs are more readily addressed. In some circumstances, however, introducing psychological interventions to patients was considered challenging and the introduction of new referral processes was raised concerns. To ensure sustainability more work is required to reduce professional isolation and ensure efficient referral procedures between primary and secondary care services are established to reduce concerns over issues related to clinical governance and potential risk to patient. The findings provide professional insight into the key challenges of introducing a Pain Platform incorporating psychological support across primary and secondary care services within a local service. These included development of sustainable procedures and closer working relationships. Areas requiring future development are identified.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 17%
Student > Bachelor 13 14%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 29 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 17%
Psychology 14 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 34 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 September 2019.
All research outputs
#19,954,338
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,890
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,229
of 345,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#45
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.