Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 51-9 | Page 75

Lay-tutors in a back school programme Lorig et al. has explored the use of patients, who had experienced effective pain relief through self- management of their own condition, as role models (6, 7). These studies showed that role models invited to educational programmes as active partners might encourage and motivate participants in BSPs. Other lay-led programmes, such as the Arthritis Self-Mana- gement Programme (ASMP) for patients with chronic disease (8), support this observation. Therefore, we designed a programme that included lay-persons as tutors for patients with low back pain. To our know- ledge, no studies have evaluated the long-term effects of using lay-tutors as active partners in a BSP, compa- ring them with similar programmes led by healthcare professionals (5). The aim of the present randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) was to evaluate the effect of ad- ding a lay-tutor to the educational sessions of a BSP for patients with subacute low back pain (SLBPP). It was hypothesized that patients whose education was facilitated by lay-tutors would be more motivated to stay active despite pain and to perform activities of daily living, thereby showing better improvement in functional capacity, pain and health-related outcomes than patients taught solely by healthcare professionals. METHODS Table I. Procedures during a 10-week intervention programme including 10 sessions of education and 20 sessions of exercise Session number Teacher Topic 1 Welcome and introduction 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Design This RCT was conducted in collaboration with the rehabilitation unit “SANO”, local physiotherapy clinics, the Section of Social Medicine and Rehabilitation and the university rheumatology clinic, in order to determine effective educational and exercise programmes. Fig. 1 shows the patient flow through recruitment, intervention and follow-up. 699 16 17 18 19 20 Lay-tutor and 1 Physiotherapist Lay-tutor and 1 Physiotherapist Physiotherapist Physiotherapist Lay-tutor Physiotherapist Physiotherapist Physiotherapist Lay-tutor Physiotherapist Time, min Motivation Physical tests Exercise programme How to identify individual goals? Exercise programme Exercise programme How to understand diagnosis? Exercise programme: focus on specific muscle groups Physiotherapist Exercise programme: focus on specific muscle groups Physiotherapist Activities of daily living Lay-tutor Barriers, how to manage? Physiotherapist Exercise programme: focus on different muscle groups and movement patterns Physiotherapist Exercise programme: focus on different muscle groups Physiotherapist Activities of daily living Lay-tutor Barriers, from where and from whom can I get help if needed? Physiotherapist Exercise programme and how to sit properly Physiotherapist Exercise programme Physiotherapist Pain mechanisms Lay-tutor What do I do when it hurts? Physiotherapist Exercise programme and how to relax Physiotherapist Exercise programme Lay-tutor How to cope with pain? Physiotherapist Exercise programme and how to cope Physiotherapist Exercise programme Physiotherapist Exercise habits Lay-tutor Exercise habits Physiotherapist Home exercise programme Physiotherapist Exercise programme Physiotherapist Medication Lay-tutor Experiences and follow-up Physiotherapist Exercise programme Physiotherapist Exercise programme Physiotherapist Exercise programme Lay-tutor and 1 Finishing up and questionnaire Physiotherapist Physiotherapist Physical tests 30 30 60 60 60 60 60 60 15+45 60 20 40 15+45 60 20 40 15+45 60 30 30 15+45 60 60 15+45 60 20 40 15+45 60 20 40 60 60 60 60 60 Back school programme Experimental set-up. The BSP was based on self-management strategies, with the goal of motivating the participants to stay active and to change their health-related behaviour. The programme consisted of 2 sessions each week for a 10-week period, a total of 20 sessions (Table I). Once a week, the patients participated in a 2-h session with 1 h of education and 1 h of physical exercises. The other weekly session included only 1 h of physical exercises. Educational part of the programme. This part consisted of providing information related to the condition of the patients. It included disease-specific information on anatomy, pain physio- logy and ergonomics. General information included how to cope with back pain in everyday life and provided examples of how to change bad habits and develop pain-coping strategies. The patients were encouraged to set personal goals as an important component in promoting self-management. In the intervention group, the lay-tutor was responsible for general information (40 min) and the physiotherapist for disease-specific information (20 min). In the control group, 2 physiotherapists covered the entire lesson. Physical exercise part of the programme. Each exercise session included aerobic training and exercise, focusing on strength, stability, coordination, balance, flexibility and relaxation. The sessions were group-based, but were adjusted to accommodate the individual patient. During each session, the participants were encouraged to take responsibility for their own progression through the programme, while the physiotherapists gave exer- cise instruction, feedback, and acted as motivators. At the end of the programme, all patients had an individualized physical exercise plan to follow. Prior to the study, a detailed manual was developed for both the educational and the physical exercise components in order to standardize the BSP. All lay-tutors and physiotherapists participated in a 2-day introductory course led by clinical experts in the field of low back rehabilitation. In addition, the physiotherapists attended a 1-day course focused on the exercise lessons. A Danish version of the manual is available on request from the corresponding author. Intervention. The intervention represented the participation of the lay-tutor in the educational part of the BSP. The lay-tutors J Rehabil Med 51, 2019