Cited by 53Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsDigital Mental Health InterventionsMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

Health care providers' experiences of pain management and attitudes towards digitally supported self-management interventions for chronic pain: a qualitative study

Open access
Varsi, Cecilie, Ledel Solem, Ingrid Konstanse, Eide, Hilde, Børøsund, Elin, Kristjansdottir, Olöf B., Heldal, Karina, Waxenberg, Lori B., Weiss, Karen E. +4 more·2021·BMC Health Services Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain constitutes a significant burden for the individuals affected, and is a frequent reason why patients seek health care services. While in-person psychosocial interventions can be of support to people living with chronic pain, such interventions are not always accessible. eHealth interventions may provide greater accessibility, but the evidence and use of digital self-management solutions for chronic pain are still limited and the lack of health care provider input in the development process of such solutions a concern. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to investigate health care providers' experiences of treating patients with chronic pain, their attitudes towards, and use of, digital solutions in pain management, and their suggestions for content and design elements for a potential digital pain self-management intervention. METHODS: Twelve health care providers representing a variety of health care disciplines participated in semi-structured interviews. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The material was analyzed into three main themes: [1] Patients with chronic pain and their current use of the health care services, [2] Health care providers' own motivation and impression of patient prerequisites for use of digital self-management interventions, and [3] Suggestions for content and design elements in a digital self-management intervention for people living with chronic pain. The challenges faced by patients living with chronic pain were described as numerous. Despite interest and positive attitudes, few of the health care providers had used or recommended eHealth solutions to their patients. A range of potential content and functionality elements were identified, including aspects of motivation and engagement and providers also emphasized the importance of easy access and positive, personal content to support existing treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study offers insights into health care providers' considerations for the potential of digital self-management interventions supporting patients living with chronic pain. Findings indicate the need for change and a more comprehensive treatment approach to pain management. eHealth solutions may contribute to such change, and providers pointed to a need for health care provider involvement, timely support and follow-up as important factors for integrating digital pain self-management interventions into clinical care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03705104.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12913-021-06278-7

Cites

92 of 92 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • EPIO was designed and developed in close collaboration with researchers, eHealth experts, end users, and health care providers.

    “The EPIO intervention was designed and developed in close collaboration with researchers, eHealth experts, end users, and health care providers [29-31].”

    From Short-Term Findings From Testing EPIO, a Digital Self-Management Program for People Living With Chronic Pain: Randomized Controlled Trial (2023) · cites this paper as [31]

    The Methods (Study design and participants) say that interviews with patients, spouses, and health care providers informed the intervention’s design and development, and that the research team had eHealth development expertise. The Discussion (Future implications) says these studies provided input toward the intervention cited as EPIO in reference 73. The paper supports stakeholder input, but does not establish the claimed close collaboration among all four groups throughout EPIO’s design and development. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Existing digital pain management interventions have challenges including limited theoretical basis, limited user involvement, attrition/adherence problems, limited efficacy testing particularly beyond 3 months, and limited implementation planning.

    “Challenges with existing digital pain management interventions nevertheless include limited or lack of theoretical basis19,75; limited or lack of user (ie, people with chronic pain and health care providers) involvement during the design and development processes60; challenges with program attrition/adherence2,41; limited efficacy testing/evidence of effect,38,61 particularly from trials longer”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Varsi, C., Ledel Solem, I. K., Eide, H., Børøsund, E., Kristjansdottir, O. B., Heldal, K., Waxenberg, L. B., Weiss, K. E., Schreurs, K. M. G., Morrison, E. J., Stubhaug, A., & Solberg Nes, L.
Affiliations
  • Oslo University Hospital (NO)
  • Sunnaas sykehus (NO)
  • University of Florida (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of Twente (NL)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Varsi, Cecilie
Venue
BMC Health Services Research
Published
2021-03-25
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
275-275
ISSN
1472-6963 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3137947372
Cited by
53
References
91
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 2
FWCI
8.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Health Services Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Duo Research Archive (University of Oslo) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Norges Forskningsråd (256574)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
chronic pain, digital self-management intervention, e-health, pain management, health care access, patient engagement, psychosocial interventions
MeSH terms
Self-Management, Attitude, Health Personnel, Humans, Qualitative Research, Chronic Pain, Pain Management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review