Search

Issue Addressed: Ethnic disparities in chronic pain exist in Aotearoa New Zealand, including a greater impact of pain, less access to chronic pain services and less benefit from treatment for Pasifika people. This study investigated Sāmoan health perceptions and beliefs in relation to pain and how it is managed. Methods: An interpretive descriptive study was undertaken involving interviews with nine Sāmoan key informants from Aotearoa New Zealand. Interviews explored their beliefs in relation to interpretations of pain and experiences of and preferences for pain management. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Four main themes were constructed from the data. Pain is interpreted holistically described the attribution of pain to many causes, without limitation to physiological explanations. Stoicism is a character virtue described the predominant belief that pain should be endured without display or complaint. Strength in connectivity described the inherent pain coping strategies that are present within Sāmoan communities. To improve healthcare is to nurture vā described the disconnect Sāmoan people feel from healthcare services and the need to foster relationships to improve health delivery. Conclusions: Sāmoan people have beliefs and perceptions about pain and its management that extend beyond traditional Western interpretations. While pain is often endured using traditional strengths within the 'āīga (family) and community, the Sāmoan community faces challenges in receiving healthcare from mainstream pain services. So What?: Clinicians need to foster stronger relationships with Sāmoan individuals and their 'āīga and appreciate the wider psychosocial context of pain, including spirituality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT. Poststroke hemiparetic individuals (n = 9) and a control group (n = 9) completed a frequency-scaled circle-drawing task in unimanual and bimanual conditions. Measures of intralimb spatial and temporal [...]

ABSTRACT. Twelve patients diagnosed with idiopathic Parkinson's disease and 11 age-matched control participants performed a continuous bimanual wrist flexion-extension tracking task while vision of their hands was manipulated. Participants were [...]

Work-disability following musculoskeletal injury causes a significant burden for individuals and healthcare systems. Research into work-disability prevention has investigated the ability of psychosocial factors to predict return-to-work in workers with musculoskeletal injuries. Recent research indicates that both return-to-work expectations and workplace supports influence return-to-work outcome. However, how these mechanisms operate to influence outcome is still largely unknown. We undertook a qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with workers from diverse backgrounds who were undergoing vocational rehabilitation in New Zealand following a musculoskeletal injury. Interviews investigated the injured workers' experiences of workplace supports and asked in-depth about what contributed to their expectations of returning to work. Thematic analysis was used to analyse and interpret the data. Analysis identified four key themes. We found that what workplace supports were offered and how they were taken up was related to systemic factors, and trust. We also identified a link between the offer of support from the workplace and return-to-work expectations. Finally, the actions of workers' compensation and healthcare providers during workers' recovery were reported to influence supports, expectations and the confidence injured workers experienced in their return-to-work outcome in both overt and subtle ways. This study indicated that actions of the workplace, healthcare providers and workers' compensation parties can all influence workplace supports, return-to-work expectations and return-to-work outcome. These findings therefore implicate the actions of these stakeholders in work-disability prevention efforts. Positive return-to-work expectations are increasingly shown by research to be related to positive return-to-work outcomes for injured workers. Trust between the worker and the company can underpin the provision of supports for return-to-work, which in turn can influence worker confidence and expectations of return-to-work. Consideration of workplace culture and relationships when healthcare providers interact with employers can be crucial in fostering trust and enabling appropriate workplace supports. The ways in which workers compensation processes are executed can also affect workplace relationships, and therefore influence the provision of appropriate return-to-work supports. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. There is little information on how multidisciplinary pain management programs (MPMPs), the goldstandard treatment for people with chronic non-cancer pain, should be structured or delivered. This study compared outcomes from a 3-week in-patient MPMP between those who attended a group-based program that included 8 h of individual therapy each week and those who attended when the amount of individual therapy had been halved. Methods. Participants were patients attending an MPMP with a large component of individual sessions (n = 112; Standard) and patients attending the same MPMP after it switched to predominantly group-based sessions (n = 117; Revised). The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Queen Elizabeth (QE) Health Scale were administered to participants at baseline and discharge. Regression analysis was used to compare outcomes between the two delivery formats. Results. There were no significant differences in any outcome measures between the two delivery formats overall. The QE Health Scale (P, 0.001) and HADS depression (P, 0.05) scores were significantly better for patients with rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis who had undertaken the Revised program compared with the Standard program. Conclusions. This study provides support that changing the amount of individual therapy within in-patient MPMPs does not change patient outcomes. However, there is evidence that those with rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis respond better to a more group-based approach, suggesting that different populations may be suited to different delivery formats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]