Background Clinical guidelines recommend a biopsychosocial approach to low back pain (LBP) management, with physiotherapists playing a key role in occupational health primary care (OHPC). However, little is known about how their clinical behaviours at the first visit align with guideline-oriented biopsychosocial principles. Therefore, we evaluated LBP management quality in OHPC by applying predefined criteria to physiotherapists' documentation. Methods Based on a cluster-randomised implementation study data (ISRCTN11875357) we analysed 98 electronic patient records (EPRs) documented by 28 physiotherapists across diverse OHPC units. The intervention arm had received 3-7 days of biopsychosocial training. A stratified random sample of EPRs from individuals with LBP was reviewed using a structured researcher's evaluation tool. Each item was scored dichotomously (yes/no) and evaluated against predefined quality criteria with stepwise thresholds for different work disability risk groups. Results Step I, multidimensional biopsychosocial assessment of LBP, was documented in fewer than half of the records (36.5% in the intervention vs 16.7% in the control arm, p=0.081). The biological dimension was well documented in both arms (100% vs 95.8%, p=0.245), while psychological (58.1% vs 25%, p=0.009) and social (54.1% vs 29.2%, p=0.038) dimensions were more frequently documented in the intervention arm. Step II quality criteria (low-risk patients) were met in 58.1% of intervention versus 4.2% of control records (p<0.001), and step III (medium-risk) in 55.4% versus 4.2% (p<0.001). No EPRs met step IV (high-risk) quality criteria. The intervention arm more often documented psychosocial assessments, risk stratification, behavioural strategies and advice to stay active. Person-centredness (ie, goals, values, resources, expectations) was rarely documented (36.5% vs 0%, p<0.001).Results Step I, multidimensional biopsychosocial assessment of LBP, was documented in fewer than half of the records (36.5% in the intervention vs 16.7% in the control arm, p=0.081). The biological dimension was well documented in both arms (100% vs 95.8%, p=0.245), while psychological (58.1% vs 25%, p=0.009) and social (54.1% vs 29.2%, p=0.038) dimensions were more frequently documented in the intervention arm. Step II quality criteria (low-risk patients) were met in 58.1% of intervention versus 4.2% of control records (p<0.001), and step III (medium-risk) in 55.4% versus 4.2% (p<0.001). No EPRs met step IV (high-risk) quality criteria. The intervention arm more often documented psychosocial assessments, risk stratification, behavioural strategies and advice to stay active. Person-centredness (ie, goals, values, resources, expectations) was rarely documented (36.5% vs 0%, p<0.001).Results Step I, multidimensional biopsychosocial assessment of LBP, was documented in fewer than half of the records (36.5% in the intervention vs 16.7% in the control arm, p=0.081). The biological dimension was well documented in both arms (100% vs 95.8%, p=0.245), while psychological (58.1% vs 25%, p=0.009) and social (54.1% vs 29.2%, p=0.038) dimensions were more frequently documented in the intervention arm. Step II quality criteria (low-risk patients) were met in 58.1% of intervention versus 4.2% of control records (p<0.001), and step III (medium-risk) in 55.4% versus 4.2% (p<0.001). No EPRs met step IV (high-risk) quality criteria. The intervention arm more often documented psychosocial assessments, risk stratification, behavioural strategies and advice to stay active. Person-centredness (ie, goals, values, resources, expectations) was rarely documented (36.5% vs 0%, p<0.001). Conclusion Training in guideline-oriented biopsychosocial approach was associated with more frequent documentation of behaviours aligned with high-quality LBP management. However, overall quality varied, and person-centred aspects remained underreported. Complementary implementation strategies are required to ensure consistent delivery and documentation of biopsychosocial clinical practice in OHPC.

Objectives This study aimed to investigate the effect of a brief training intervention for occupational health services (OHS) professionals on multiprofessional resource utilization and the costs of biopsychosocial management of patients with low-back pain (LBP) compared to usual care among all participants and those in work disability-based risk groups. Methods OHS utilization and back-related sick leave data were collected from electronic patient records over one-year follow-up comparing 232 patients in the intervention arm and 80 control-arm patients, stratified for risk of work disability based on the Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire. We estimated costs using linear mixed models by multiplying unit costs (in euros) by each type of OHS resource use (visits to physicians, physiotherapists, nurses, use of imaging) and the number of sick leaves. Estimated mean cost differences with confidence intervals (CI) were reported using bootstrapping to deal with skewed cost data. Results The median number of visits to physicians and physiotherapists in the intervention versus control arms was 1 [interquartile range (IQR) 0-3] and 2 (IQR 1-4) versus 2 (IQR 1-3) and 1 (IQR 0-2), respectively. The intervention arm accrued lower physician costs (<euro>-43, 95% CI <euro>-82--3, P=0.034) and higher physiotherapist costs (<euro>55, 95% CI <euro>26-84, P<0.001) compared to the control arm. There was no statistically significant difference in average total costs between the arms (<euro>-1908, 95% CI <euro>-6734-2919). In the low- and medium-risk groups of work disability, physiotherapist costs were higher in the intervention than control arm, but no statistically significant differences were observed between the arms in the total resource utilization or sickness absence costs. Conclusions Brief biopsychosocial training may support shifting OHS resources towards multiprofessional physiotherapist-driven care, instead of solely physician-driven care, for management of patients with LBP in differing risk groups of work disability with no substantial differences in total costs.

BackgroundWe explored Finnish occupational healthcare professionals' (HCP) perceptions of biopsychosocial (BPS) low back pain (LBP) management after an educational intervention.MethodsWe conducted twelve group interviews of 51 physicians, physiotherapists and nurses from intervention units in a cluster randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN11875357). We used deductive and inductive content analysis to examine the data, and the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model to identify the facilitators of and barriers to changes in three target behaviours: (A) forming a common BPS-based understanding with patients, (B) systematically using risk stratification tools, and (C) multidisciplinary collaboration in individualized care planning.ResultsFacilitators and barriers were categorized into the following COM-B domains. Most of the facilitators were in the Capability and Motivation domains: increased confidence regarding managing treatment decisions, improved therapeutic alliance and renewed professional identity. Significant system-level barriers were mostly in the Opportunity domain: time constraints, limited resources and unclear treatment pathways. The HCPs reported improved individual skills and awareness after the training, but varying organizational policies and lacking incentives hindered the adoption of BPS methods in multidisciplinary teams. Initial resistance to change decreased as positive patient outcomes emerged. The perceived benefits were increased multidisciplinary collaboration and a shift toward holistic pain management. Those who embraced BPS management reported greater professional satisfaction and confidence when handling LBP patients.ConclusionsTo effectively implement BPS management in occupational health services, organizational and system-level barriers must be addressed and HCPs' skills and motivation enhanced. For sustained support through policy initiatives and reinforced multidisciplinary collaboration, future strategies should integrate BPS practices into routine workflows.Trial registrationThe trial was retrospectively registered on 13.05.2019 ISRCTN11875357.

BACKGROUND: The Determinants of Implementation Behavior Questionnaire (DIBQ) measures facilitators or barriers of healthcare professionals implementation behaviors based on the current implementation research on practice and policy. The DIBQ covers 18 domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework and consists of 93 items. A previously tailored version (DIBQ-t) covering 10 domains and 28 items focuses on implementing best-practice low back pain care. AIM: To tailor a shortened version of DIBQ to multiprofessional rehabilitation context with cross-cultural adaptation to Finnish language. DESIGN: A two-round Delphi study. SETTING: National-level online survey. POPULATION: Purposively recruited experts in multiprofessional rehabilitation (N.=25). METHODS: Cross-cultural translation of DIBQ to Finnish was followed by a two-round Delphi survey involving diverse experts in rehabilitation (physicians, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, psychologists, nursing scientists, social scientists). In total, 25 experts in Round 1, and 21 in Round 2 evaluated the importance of DIBQ items in changing professionals implementation behavior by rating on a 5-point Likert Scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree) of including each item in the final scale. Consensus to include an item was defined as a mean score of &gt;= 4 by &gt;= 75% of Delphi participants. Open comments were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Items with agreement of &lt;= 74% were either directly excluded or reconsidered and modified depending on qualitative judgements, amended with experts suggestions. After completing an analogous second-round, a comparison with DIBQ-t was performed. Lastly, the relevance of each item was indexed using content validity index on item-level (I-CVI) and scale-level (S-CVI/Ave). RESULTS: After Round 1, 17 items were included and 48 excluded by consensus whereas 28 items were reconsidered, and 20 items added for Round 2. The open comments were categorized as: 1) "modifying"; 2) "supportive"; and 3) "critical". After Round 2, consensus was reached regarding all items, to include 21 items. After comparison with DIBQ-t, the final multiprofessional DIBQ (DIBQ-mp) covers 11 TDF domains and 21 items with I-CVIs of &gt;= 0.78 and S-CVI/Ave of 0.93. CONCLUSIONS: A Delphi study condensed a DIBQ-mp with excellent content validity for multiprofessional rehabilitation context. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: A potential tool for evaluating determinants in implementing evidence-based multiprofessional rehabilitation interventions.