Group Physical Therapy Programs for Military Members With Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial

• Published in: The journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy 2024-06, Vol.54 (6), p.1-426
• Main Authors: Dupuis, Frédérique, Perreault, Kadija, Hébert, Luc J, Perron, Marc, Fredette, Anny, Desmeules, François, Roy, Jean-Sébastien
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Military Personnel; Musculoskeletal Diseases - rehabilitation; Musculoskeletal Diseases - therapy; Pain Measurement; Patient Satisfaction; Physical Therapy Modalities; Quality of Life; Young Adult
• ISSN: 0190-6011; 1938-1344; 1938-1344
• DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2024.12342

To compare the effects of personalized, supervised group-based programs (ie, group physical therapy programs) and usual one-on-one physical therapy care (ie, usual physical therapy care) on disability for military personnel suffering from low back pain, rotator cuff-related shoulder pain, patellofemoral pain syndrome, or lateral ankle sprain. Secondary outcomes were pain severity, pain-related fear, health-related quality of life, and patients' satisfaction with their condition and care. Non-inferiority pragmatic randomized clinical trial. One hundred twenty military personnel from the Canadian Armed Forces, experiencing 1 of 4 targeted musculoskeletal disorders, were consecutively recruited and randomly assigned to group physical therapy programs or usual physical therapy care. Disability, pain severity, pain-related fear, and health-related quality-of-life outcomes were measured at 6, 12, and 26 weeks after baseline. Satisfaction with treatment was evaluated at the end of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses using linear mixed models with random effects were used to compare the effects of interventions. Chi-square tests were used to compare satisfaction. There were no significant Time × Group interactions for any of the primary and secondary outcomes (Time × Group: >.67). Satisfaction with treatment also did not differ between groups ( >.05). Statistically significant and clinically important improvements were observed in both groups for all outcomes after 12 weeks (Time effect: