Dry Needling
Conditions
Keywords
informed consent, adverse event, delphi
Brief summary
Dry Needling is an intervention that continues to gain widespread interest as a treatment adjunct for various pathological conditions. With the increased use of dry needling in the clinic, there comes a need for additional research to investigate the adverse events associated with the use of dry needling. Informed Consent is a process that is legally required in many states prior to the performance of a treatment intervention like dry needling. It is important therefore to identify which of these adverse events should be included in an informed consent process.
Detailed description
Over the past 10 years, there have been a great deal of studies that examined the application of DN to varying pathological conditions. Some of the more recent studies involving the application of DN for various conditions include: temporomandibular joint dysfunction (TMD), post-stroke, plantar heel pain or plantar fasciitis, osteoarthritis, headache, fibromyalgia, neck and shoulder pain, lateral epicondylagia, back pain, and hallux valgus. In addition to studies that applied DN to specific pathological conditions, the effects of DN have also been studied. DN has been shown to: improve spasticity and range of motion (ROM), improve flexibility of muscles, myofascial trigger point pain, scar tissue, and neuromuscular control. As DN interest continues to expand and studies continue to show the feasibility of applying DN to a wider range of pathological conditions, there is a need to understand the risks related to the use of DN. Understanding the risks associated with DN will allow for improvements in clinical decision making regarding whether DN is an appropriate choice for the patient. Informed Consent (IC) is a means of respecting the autonomous preferences of persons seeking health care or participation in research. One of the important elements of IC is the need to be explicit and descriptive about the risks of treatment which include: the nature of the risk, the probability the risk will occur, the severity of the risk, and the proximity of the risk. These are important elements that would allow the patient to be able to consider the risks to benefit ratio of a given intervention and will lead to making a better informed decision regarding their own care. Without the risks being properly identified for the intervention, the IC process could not be adhered to and the patient would not be able to make a well-informed decision regarding their own care. There have been no studies that have described how the risks associated with DN should be incorporated during the IC process to drive patient-centered care and autonomy in decision making. The purpose of this study will be to utilize a Modified Delphi framework to identify expert consensus on which risks should be included in the IC process.
Interventions
OTHERDelphi Questionaire
This study involves the use of questionnaires across 3 rounds as follows: The objectives of round 1 are to collect participant demographic information and generate a list of adverse events. Round 1 will be open for 3 weeks with email reminders being provided at weeks 1 and 2. The objectives of round 2 will be to share a list of adverse events generated from round 1 (with the addition of adverse events identified in literature if not generated in round 1) and allow participants to rate from 1-4 how important each item is for inclusion on informed consent. As per round 1, the round 2 questionnaire will remain active for 3 weeks with email reminders sent at weeks 1 and 2. The objective of round 3 is to further gain consensus on adverse events from the results of round 2 where agreement was not reached. Round 3 remains active for 3 weeks with email reminders sent at weeks 1 and 2.
Sponsors
Youngstown State University
Study design
Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 100 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
Physical Therapists who: Have \>= 7 years of clinical practice performing dry needling and at least ONE of the following secondary criteria: 1. Certification in Dry Needling 2. Completion of a manual therapy fellowship that included dry needling training 3. \>= 1 total scholarly product (poster presentation, author of a peer-reviewed publication)
Exclusion criteria
* Not a Physical Therapist * Has less than 7 years experience in dry needling * Does not meet the secondary criteria established in the inclusion criteria
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Demographic Information Form | Baseline | Contains questions about the characteristics of the participants |
| Round 1 Questionnaire | Baseline to 3 weeks | Participants list known adverse events associated with dry needling |
| Round 2 Questionnaire | 3 weeks to 6 weeks | Participants identify which adverse events they agree should be included during informed consent. |
| Round 3 Questionnaire | 6 weeks to 9 weeks | Participants will see the results from round 2 and further identify which adverse events should be included for informed consent. |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed