SPADI Intervention Report

Using a true experimental study and a between-subject design, the forty-five participants are to be randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions. In an effort to eliminate negative expectancy biases, demand characteristics, and reactivity on assessments, participants are not to be informed of which one of the three conditions they are to be assigned to. Using a ABA design, participants are going to first be assessed using the GAD-7 to establish a baseline of symptoms. The GAD-7 is a short seven-item self-report questionnaire that is proven to have strong reliability as well as good construct and procedural validity (Spitzer, et al., 2006). Upon establishing a baseline for each participant, one of the three treatment conditions are to be implemented as the studies independent variables. After

The ratings for this scale vary from no pain, a zero, to the worst pain one could possibly endure, a ten ('Misha' Backonja & Farrar, 2015).  This type of tool used for measuring pain is considered a self-assessment.  Meaning, the individual rates his/her pain on the provided scale.  All individuals who have received medical treatment, whether for a serious injury or a yearly physical, has been asked, “What would you rate your pain today, on a scale of one to ten?”.  This pain assessment tool is considered a fully ordered variable due to the individual having a wide range to rate his/her

Three different measurements were taken before and after the study. They included, pain intensity, disability, and quality of life. Pain was taken using a visual analog scale (VAS) which ranges from 0 to 10; 0 equaling no pain at all and 10 equaling the worst pain ever felt. Disability was taken using the Neck Disability Index (NDI). The NDI consisted of 10 items and were scored using percentages, the higher the percentage the higher the disability. And lastly, quality of life was taken using the Medical Outcome Study Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36). Scores in SF-36 ranged from 0 to 100 and the higher the patients number got, the better quality of life.

In order to establish a treatment, plan it is important to set goals for this patient. In general goals for RA include early recognition and diagnosis, referral to a rheumatologist, and tight control and low disease activity (Cohen & Cannella, 2017). There are also scales that need to be completed by the NP and patient to determine how the treatment is working for a patient. When setting goals, it is important to determine a successful way to evaluate this patients' pain. In the older population it is common for pain to be under treated and part of the cause of this is because the assessment for pain is not matching the patients' needs. Once a successful evaluation has been chosen for this pain it would be important to use this same

The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) is a tool that is administered, and scored due to its’ simple applicability to a vast variety of disability levels and conditions and all lower-extremity sites. This particular scale is easy to read when it comes to understanding error-associated measurements and for verifying the least clinically important score changes and is adequate enough to measure of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change, at a position that is proportionate with application at an individual patient level (1). The LEFS scale abstract framework is based on the World Health Organization’s model of the handicap and disabled. It was developed to be competent to manage, score, and record in the medical record with

To provide the best care for their elderly patients, nurses must incorporate pain assessment into their daily care of patients. Pain assessment is a key aspect of the nurse’s role. There are many factors to consider when assessing patients’ pain such as if they are verbal or non-verbal, what language they speak, their age and their cultural background. There are many tools that a nurse can use to assess a patient’s pain but one of the most common tools is the 0-10 scale. This tool can be asked verbally by asking what

ANSWER: It is correct as the p-values for Hamstring strength indices 60°/s and all variables remained grander than 0.05. The p-values were 0.08, 0.06, 0.424, 0.506, and 0.802. These p-values do not suggest significance at the 5% level. The r values among Hamstring strength indices 60%/s and functional solidity all are not significant at 0.05 and 0.01 both significant level. Therefore, suggests no significant connection and because of this cause, this can be conclude that not any significant connection possibly will be defined among Hamstring strength indices 60%/s and functional solidity.

Although NRS-11 pain measures are technically classified as ordinal measures, most studies using NRS-11 as an outcome measure utilize parametric tests and consider the measures as interval or ratio data rather than ordinal measures.27 Therefore, assuming homogenous variance and a normal distribution, a parametric 2-tailed mixed-ANCOVA will be used as the primary statistical analysis. Prior to

For shoulder flexion 61% of the variance could be accounted for by the sit-and-reach. A correlation was also found between the modified sit-and-reach test and both the shoulder extension and hip flexion tests. For shoulder extension 33% of the variance was accounted for by the modified sit-and-reach and for hip flexion 22% of the variance was accounted for by the modified sit-and-reach.

SSc severity scale in which nine organ systems and identified variables for each one which could be used for defining severity. These systems are general system, peripheral vascular system, skin, joint/tendon, skeletal muscle system, lung, heart, gastointerstinal tract and kidneys. On each organ system, severity scales were developed from 0 (no documented involvement) to 4 (end stage disease) for each organ system. This would be beneficial in disease status assessment (Medsger et al. 2007).

The specific aim of this cross-sectional study is to improve pain outcome in patients with chronic idiopathic neck pain (CINP), providing foundational information for ultimately improving function and cutting costs. To do this, the study will examine how many visits of mobilization (hypothesis) affect the MCID on pain reduction for patients to begin exercising for functional gains. In addition,

Reliability: Good internal consistency as demonstrated by Cronbach’s alpha=0.90 for DASH disability and symptom scale

According to the table, the majority of participants are Black, accounting for 55%, following by Hispanic, white and other race/ethnicities. Of these, 58% are females. The mean of fatigue score is 2.66 (S.D.=0.94) and 43% reported the fatigue score as moderate level. The participants rated the various pain score from 0 to 10 and the mean of pain score is 4.64 (S.D.=3.01). Other factors such as a satisfaction with social activities score, mental health score, and quality of life score in moderate level with 39%, 36%, and 42%. While, nearly 42% of participants rated a physical health score as lower level.

VAS is formed by a 100 mm horizontal line anchored on both ends, with the left end denotes the minimum score and the other end as the maximum score. VAS anchors, time period of reporting and instructions of use vary depending on the intended use of the scale. For pain intensity, the left-most anchor indicates “no pain,” which is a score of 0 and the right-most anchor indicates “worst imaginable pain,” which is a score of 100 on a 100 mm scale. Pain VAS is self-completed by the participant where they are asked to draw a line perpendicular to the VAS line at the point that represents their pain intensity. Value of pain intensity is obtained by measuring the distance from the “no pain” anchor to the perpendicular line drawn by the participant.

Neck pain is quite common, can be burdensome, and costly. One-year prevalence (Hogg-Johnson et al. 2008, Hoy et al. 2010) of neck pain (common) and activity-limiting neck pain (less common) ranged from 30%-50% and 2-11% respectively. The prevalence is higher in women (Kääriä et al. 2012) and is highest in the middle age. Out of 289 causes of disability worldwide and