FB Informatik + Therapiewissenschaft
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (30)
Volltext vorhanden
- ja (30) (entfernen)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- nein (30)
Schlagworte
- Rückenschmerz (11)
- Physikalische Therapie (5)
- low back pain (4)
- stratified care (4)
- Sport (3)
- Sportler (3)
- back pain (3)
- sports (3)
- Übung (3)
- Bewegungsapparat (2)
Institut
Introduction: The use of social marketing strategies to induce the promotion of cognitive health has received little attention in research. The objective of this scoping review is twofold: (i) to identify the social marketing strategies that have been used in recent years to initiate and maintain health-promoting behaviour; (ii) to advance research in this area to inform policy and practice on how to best make use of these strategies to promote cognitive health.
Methods and analysis: We will use the five-stage methodological framework of Arksey and O'Malley. Articles in English published since 2010 will be searched in electronic databases (the Cochrane Library, DoPHER, the International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, PsycInfo, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus). Quantitative and qualitative study designs as well as reviews will be considered. We will include those articles that report the design, implementation, outcomes and evaluation of programmes and interventions concerning social marketing and/or health promotion and/or promotion of cognitive health. Grey literature will not be searched. Two independent reviewers will assess in detail the abstracts and full text of selected citations against the inclusion criteria. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flowchart for Scoping Reviews will be used to illustrate the process of article selection. We will use a data extraction form, present the results through narrative synthesis and discuss them in relation to the scoping review research questions.
Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval is not required for conducting this scoping review. The results of the review will be the first step to advance a conceptual framework, which contributes to the development of interventions targeting the promotion of cognitive health. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. They will also be disseminated to key stakeholders in the field of the promotion of cognitive health.
Background: The STarT-MSK-Tool is an adaptation of the well established STarT-Back-Tool, used to risk-stratify patients with a wider range of musculoskeletal presentations.
Objective: To formally translate and cross-culturally adapt the Keele STarT-MSK risk stratification tool into German (STarT-MSKG) and to establish its reliability and validity.
Methods: A formal, multi-step, forward and backward translation approach was used. To assess validity patients aged ≥18 years, with acute, subacute or chronic musculoskeletal presentations in the lumbar spine, hip, knee, shoulder, or neck were included. The prospective cohort was used with initial data collected electronically at the point-of-consultation. Retest and 6-month follow-up questionnaires were sent by email. Test-retest reliability, construct validity, discriminative ability, predictive ability and floor or ceiling effects were analysed using intraclass correlation coefficient, and comparisons with a reference standard (Orebro-Musculoskeletal-Pain-Questionnaire: OMPQ) using correlations, ROC-curves and regression models.
Results: The participants’ (n = 287) mean age was 47 (SD = 15.8) years, 51% were female, with 48.8% at low, 43.6% at medium, and 7.7% at high risk. With ICC = 0.75 (95% CI 0.69; 0.81) test-retest-reliability was good. Construct validity was good with correlations for the STarT-MSKG-Tool against the OMPQ-Tool of rs = 0.74 (95% CI 0.68, 0.79). The ability of the tool [comparison OMPQ] to predict 6-month pain and disability was acceptable with AUC = 0.77 (95% CI 0.71, 0.83) [OMPQ = 0.74] and 0.76 (95% CI 0.69, 0.82) [OMPQ = 0.72] respectively. However, the explained variance (linear/logistic regression) for predicting 6-month pain (21% [OMPQ = 17%]/logistic = 29%) and disability (linear = 20%:[OMPQ = 19%]/logistic = 26%), whilst being comparable to the existing OMPQ reference standard, fell short of the a priori target of ≥30%.
Conclusions: The German version of the STarT-MSK-Tool is a valid instrument for use across multiple musculoskeletal conditions and is availabe for use in clinical practice. Comparison with the OMPQ suggests it is a good alternative.