search
Back to results

Cluster Randomised Feasibility Trial of the Pain at Work Toolkit in Employees With Chronic Pain

Primary Purpose

Chronic Pain, Pain, Chronic

Status
Not yet recruiting
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
United Kingdom
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Pain at Work Toolkit
Active control
Sponsored by
University of Nottingham
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional other trial for Chronic Pain

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesAccepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion Criteria (Organisations) organisations in England organisations with 10 or more employees. Inclusion Criteria (Employee participants) working-age adults (employees) aged 18 and over self-reported chronic pain interfering with their ability to undertake or enjoy productive work able to comprehend English language able to provide informed consent. Exclusion Criteria (Organisations) organisations outside of England micro-organisations with fewer than 10 employees Exclusion Criteria (Employee participants) unemployed at recruitment under 18 years of age no chronic pain at recruitment unable to comprehend English language unable to provide informed consent

Sites / Locations

  • University of Nottingham

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

Active Comparator

Arm Label

Intervention Group: Pain at Work Toolkit

Active Control Group: Treatment as Usual

Arm Description

Intervention participants receive the PAW toolkit plus 3 x optional occupational therapy calls (approximately 30 minutes each) involving orientation to the PAW Toolkit and individually tailored advice and behavioural strategies for managing pain at work. This digital web-based toolkit is designed to support people with chronic pain in self-managing their condition at work. PAW offers evidence-based advice about chronic or persistent pain, disability rights, work capacity, pain self-management strategies and signposting to support.

Participants do not receive the PAW Toolkit but instead have treatment as usual (TAU) from their employer. The nature of TAU will be recorded as part of the feasibility study. Depending on the employing organisation, TAU may consist of (but is not limited to) any combination of the following: occupational health, counselling, line manager support, signposting to education about factors that may have positive or negative effects on chronic pain. Participants can access non-specialist telephone calls from a researcher to discuss their participation in the study.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Recruitment to the study
Number recruited to assess whether it would be possible to recruit to a definitive trial. The investigators will record the number recruited, characteristics of those recruited, and the timescale to recruit.
Acceptability of Intervention
Outcome to assess whether participants find the intervention acceptable. This will be self-reported in participant interviews at 6 months.
Fidelity of intervention (PAW Toolkit)
Intervention fidelity will be checked through collection of usage data for the PAW Toolkit, to assess engagement with the intervention. This data will be collected through a feedback form at 3 months.
Fidelity of intervention (OT support calls)
Intervention fidelity will be checked through recording of the uptake of occupational therapy support calls (to assess engagement with the intervention). This data will be collected through forms completed by the therapist at the time of each phone call which will be summed at 3 months.
Retention to the study at 3 months
Number of participants who complete the first follow-up outcome measures survey.
Retention to the study at 6 months
Number of participants who complete the second follow-up outcome measures survey.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Work presenteeism
Using the Work Limitations Questionnaire-25 (WLQ-25). To measure the degree to which pain interferes with specific components of job performance and the productivity impact of these work limitations. Scale range 0-111. Higher scores indicate worse outcome.
Work Ability
Using the Work Ability Index Item1 (WAI1). Assesses current work ability compared to highest work ability ever. Scale range is 0-10. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Work Self-Efficacy
Using the Work Self-Efficacy Scale (WSES). This includes 10 items assessing perceptions regarding specific work domains such as the capability to manage interpersonal relationships (colleagues and direct superiors), to work with colleagues with different characteristics and experiences, to behave efficaciously in the work context, to learn new working methods, to respect schedules and work deadlines, and to achieve assigned goals. Respondent rates capability on each item from 1 (Not well at all) to 5 (Very well). Higher score indicates better outcome.
Job satisfaction
Global single-item measure. Using the item: 'Taking everything into consideration, how do you feel about your job as a whole?' with responses ranging from 1 = extremely dissatisfied through to 5 = extremely satisfied. Higher score indicates better outcome.
Job stressfulness
Global single-item measure. Using the item: 'In general, how stressful do you find your job?' with responses on a 5 point scale ranging from 1 = 'not at all stressful' through to 5 = 'extremely stressful'. Higher score indicates worse outcome.
Turnover intentions
Global single item measure. Using the item: 'Are you considering leaving your job due to your pain?' (yes or no). Negative response is better outcome.
Depression
Using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2). Scale is used to screen for depression. Scores ranges from 0-6. Higher scores indicate worse outcome.
Anxiety
Using the General Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7). Used as a screening tool and severity measure for generalised anxiety disorder. The GAD-7 score is calculated by assigning scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3, to the response categories of 'not at all', 'several days', 'more than half the days', and 'nearly every day', respectively, and adding together the scores for the seven questions. Higher scores indicate worse outcome.
Health-related quality of life
Using the EuroQol Five Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L). Comprises five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems. Results in a 5-digit number that describes participant's health status, where higher scores indicate more severe or frequent problems.
Impairments in work and activities
Using the Work Productivity and Impairments Scale (WPAI-GH). Measures impairments in both paid work and unpaid work. It measures absenteeism, presenteeism as well as the impairments in unpaid activity because of health problem during the past seven days. The WPAI yields four types of scores: 1. Absenteeism (work time missed); 2. Presenteeism (impairment at work / reduced on-the-job effectiveness); 3. Work productivity loss (overall work impairment / absenteeism plus presenteeism); 4. Activity Impairment. WPAI outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages, with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity (worse outcomes).
Health resource use questionnaire
Using a measure of health resource use (secondary and primary care; social care; private health care).
Social support at work
Using the Demand Control Support Questionnaire (DCSQ) - Social Support Sub-Scale consisting of 6 items covering: pleasant atmosphere, spirit of unity, colleagues support, helpful colleagues, relationship with superiors, relationship with colleagues. Respondents are asked to report their levels of agreement or disagreement on a four-point Likert scale. Higher values indicate better outcome (higher social support at work, score range 6-24).

Full Information

First Posted
March 27, 2023
Last Updated
April 28, 2023
Sponsor
University of Nottingham
Collaborators
Nuffield Trust, Versus Arthritis, University of Aberdeen, University of Exeter, Monash University
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT05838677
Brief Title
Cluster Randomised Feasibility Trial of the Pain at Work Toolkit in Employees With Chronic Pain
Official Title
Multicentre Pragmatic Cluster Randomised Controlled Feasibility Trial to Assess Potential Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of the Pain at Work Toolkit in Employees With Chronic or Persistent Pain
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
April 2023
Overall Recruitment Status
Not yet recruiting
Study Start Date
August 1, 2023 (Anticipated)
Primary Completion Date
August 30, 2025 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
November 30, 2025 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
University of Nottingham
Collaborators
Nuffield Trust, Versus Arthritis, University of Aberdeen, University of Exeter, Monash University

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
This project will test the feasibility and acceptability of the Pain at Work (PAW) Toolkit which aims to help employees self-manage chronic or persistent pain at work. Ultimately, the investigators want to discover if it improves employees' health, wellbeing, confidence to self-manage their condition, and reduces impacts on their ability to work and be productive at work. Prior to testing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PAW Toolkit in a large-scale randomised trial, the investigators are conducting a multicentre pragmatic cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial. This will establish whether the PAW Toolkit, and our research processes, are feasible and acceptable in workplace settings, and will inform the design of a future trial. In this feasibility study, organisations will be randomised at site level to receive the intervention (PAW Toolkit plus occupational therapist (OT) support calls) or control (treatment as usual) for any individual employees who consent to take part. The investigators aim to recruit around 120 participants ("individual employees") from around 8 sites ("clusters"). Data will be collected from employees and organisations at baseline, 3 months and 6 months, using online surveys. At 6 months, up tp 40 people from across different sites and job roles will be interviewed, including employees who have accessed the PAW Toolkit, and other stakeholders (people who have been involved in supporting them at work, such as their line manager). The data will be used assess whether the intervention and the research processes are acceptable and feasible, and the information collected will be used to plan a large-scale randomised controlled trial.
Detailed Description
Background: Chronic or persistent pain affects around 28 million adults in the United Kingdom (UK), reducing quality of life and people's ability to work or be productive at work. Sickness absence and reduced productivity costs the UK economy ยฃ73 billion per year. Access to work advice and support for people living with pain is variable. Most people with chronic pain do not receive work advice through healthcare services, and employers do not routinely provide education or support for people with chronic pain. The Pain at Work (PAW) Toolkit aims to equip people who have pain with the knowledge, skills and confidence to: effectively self-manage a painful condition at work; access help and support; enjoy a better work experience; remain in the workforce. Aims: The aim of the trial is to determine the feasibility of conducting a definitive cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PAW Toolkit for working-age adults with chronic or persistent pain. To achieve this, the objectives are: To measure feasibility outcomes to assess whether it would be possible to recruit to a definitive trial (recruitment, retention). To test the feasibility of reaching different employee groups (e.g., age, gender, ethnicity, job role or type), sectors (e.g., public, private, third) and organisation types (e.g., small-to-medium, or large enterprises). To explore whether participants and employers find the intervention and trial design acceptable. To obtain an estimate of the intra-cluster correlation coefficient to inform the future sample size calculation for the main trial. To collect a range of outcome measures to help identify the most appropriate primary outcome for a definitive trial. To collect data to assess the feasibility of capturing health economic data in a future trial. To design a future trial and implementation plan. Protocol/ Method: Trial configuration includes 3 work packages (WP's): feasibility trial (WP1); health economics evaluation (WP2); nested interview study (WP3). Setting is community, comprised of employment settings in different sectors (public, private, third) in England, varying in size (small:10-49 workers; medium: 50-249 workers; large: >250 workers). Sample size estimate: The aim is to recruit a minimum of 8 worksites ("clusters"), approximately 4 per arm. Up to 120 participants ("employees") will be recruited from these clusters over 12 months. A nested interview study will be conducted, in which up to 40 people will be interviewed after 6 months. Participants in the interview study will include employees from the intervention arm, and stakeholders (identified by employees as having been involved in their support at work). Stakeholders may include line managers, company owners, human resources or occupational health specialists, or trade union representatives). Organisations are randomised to either i) active control group (TAU: treatment as usual), or ii) TAU plus PAW Toolkit. Intervention participants can also opt in to receive up to 3 telephone calls with an occupational therapist. The content of the calls will include orientation to the PAW Toolkit and individually tailored advice on managing pain at work. The following outcome measures will be collected (for detail, see Outcome Measures section): A. Feasibility and acceptability outcomes: B. Employer-reported outcome measures C. Participant-reported outcome measures (PROMs)

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Chronic Pain, Pain, Chronic

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Other
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Model Description
This study is an open-label, two-arm, multicentre, pragmatic cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial.
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
120 (Anticipated)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Intervention Group: Pain at Work Toolkit
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Intervention participants receive the PAW toolkit plus 3 x optional occupational therapy calls (approximately 30 minutes each) involving orientation to the PAW Toolkit and individually tailored advice and behavioural strategies for managing pain at work. This digital web-based toolkit is designed to support people with chronic pain in self-managing their condition at work. PAW offers evidence-based advice about chronic or persistent pain, disability rights, work capacity, pain self-management strategies and signposting to support.
Arm Title
Active Control Group: Treatment as Usual
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Participants do not receive the PAW Toolkit but instead have treatment as usual (TAU) from their employer. The nature of TAU will be recorded as part of the feasibility study. Depending on the employing organisation, TAU may consist of (but is not limited to) any combination of the following: occupational health, counselling, line manager support, signposting to education about factors that may have positive or negative effects on chronic pain. Participants can access non-specialist telephone calls from a researcher to discuss their participation in the study.
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Pain at Work Toolkit
Other Intervention Name(s)
PAW Toolkit
Intervention Description
Online toolkit providing advice and signposting to help people self-manage chronic or persistent pain at work. Access to optional phone call support from an occupational therapist providing individually tailored advice.
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
Active control
Other Intervention Name(s)
Treatment as usual (TAU)
Intervention Description
Treatment as usual which will vary depending on the employing organisation but may include, for example, line manager support, occupational health input etc. Access to optional non-specialist phone call support from a study researcher.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Recruitment to the study
Description
Number recruited to assess whether it would be possible to recruit to a definitive trial. The investigators will record the number recruited, characteristics of those recruited, and the timescale to recruit.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Acceptability of Intervention
Description
Outcome to assess whether participants find the intervention acceptable. This will be self-reported in participant interviews at 6 months.
Time Frame
6 months
Title
Fidelity of intervention (PAW Toolkit)
Description
Intervention fidelity will be checked through collection of usage data for the PAW Toolkit, to assess engagement with the intervention. This data will be collected through a feedback form at 3 months.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
Fidelity of intervention (OT support calls)
Description
Intervention fidelity will be checked through recording of the uptake of occupational therapy support calls (to assess engagement with the intervention). This data will be collected through forms completed by the therapist at the time of each phone call which will be summed at 3 months.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
Retention to the study at 3 months
Description
Number of participants who complete the first follow-up outcome measures survey.
Time Frame
3 months
Title
Retention to the study at 6 months
Description
Number of participants who complete the second follow-up outcome measures survey.
Time Frame
6 months
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Work presenteeism
Description
Using the Work Limitations Questionnaire-25 (WLQ-25). To measure the degree to which pain interferes with specific components of job performance and the productivity impact of these work limitations. Scale range 0-111. Higher scores indicate worse outcome.
Time Frame
To assess change between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Title
Work Ability
Description
Using the Work Ability Index Item1 (WAI1). Assesses current work ability compared to highest work ability ever. Scale range is 0-10. Higher scores indicate better outcome.
Time Frame
To assess change between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Title
Work Self-Efficacy
Description
Using the Work Self-Efficacy Scale (WSES). This includes 10 items assessing perceptions regarding specific work domains such as the capability to manage interpersonal relationships (colleagues and direct superiors), to work with colleagues with different characteristics and experiences, to behave efficaciously in the work context, to learn new working methods, to respect schedules and work deadlines, and to achieve assigned goals. Respondent rates capability on each item from 1 (Not well at all) to 5 (Very well). Higher score indicates better outcome.
Time Frame
To assess change between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Title
Job satisfaction
Description
Global single-item measure. Using the item: 'Taking everything into consideration, how do you feel about your job as a whole?' with responses ranging from 1 = extremely dissatisfied through to 5 = extremely satisfied. Higher score indicates better outcome.
Time Frame
To assess change between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Title
Job stressfulness
Description
Global single-item measure. Using the item: 'In general, how stressful do you find your job?' with responses on a 5 point scale ranging from 1 = 'not at all stressful' through to 5 = 'extremely stressful'. Higher score indicates worse outcome.
Time Frame
To assess change between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Title
Turnover intentions
Description
Global single item measure. Using the item: 'Are you considering leaving your job due to your pain?' (yes or no). Negative response is better outcome.
Time Frame
To assess change between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Title
Depression
Description
Using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2). Scale is used to screen for depression. Scores ranges from 0-6. Higher scores indicate worse outcome.
Time Frame
To assess change between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Title
Anxiety
Description
Using the General Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7). Used as a screening tool and severity measure for generalised anxiety disorder. The GAD-7 score is calculated by assigning scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3, to the response categories of 'not at all', 'several days', 'more than half the days', and 'nearly every day', respectively, and adding together the scores for the seven questions. Higher scores indicate worse outcome.
Time Frame
To assess change between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Title
Health-related quality of life
Description
Using the EuroQol Five Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L). Comprises five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 levels: no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems and extreme problems. Results in a 5-digit number that describes participant's health status, where higher scores indicate more severe or frequent problems.
Time Frame
To assess change between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Title
Impairments in work and activities
Description
Using the Work Productivity and Impairments Scale (WPAI-GH). Measures impairments in both paid work and unpaid work. It measures absenteeism, presenteeism as well as the impairments in unpaid activity because of health problem during the past seven days. The WPAI yields four types of scores: 1. Absenteeism (work time missed); 2. Presenteeism (impairment at work / reduced on-the-job effectiveness); 3. Work productivity loss (overall work impairment / absenteeism plus presenteeism); 4. Activity Impairment. WPAI outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages, with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity (worse outcomes).
Time Frame
To assess change between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Title
Health resource use questionnaire
Description
Using a measure of health resource use (secondary and primary care; social care; private health care).
Time Frame
Cumulative health resource use at time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months), time 2 (6 months)
Title
Social support at work
Description
Using the Demand Control Support Questionnaire (DCSQ) - Social Support Sub-Scale consisting of 6 items covering: pleasant atmosphere, spirit of unity, colleagues support, helpful colleagues, relationship with superiors, relationship with colleagues. Respondents are asked to report their levels of agreement or disagreement on a four-point Likert scale. Higher values indicate better outcome (higher social support at work, score range 6-24).
Time Frame
To assess change between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures:
Title
Organisation-reported sickness absence records
Description
Organisational records of sickness absence rates for participating employees.
Time Frame
To assess change between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Title
Employment status
Description
Using items from the Work Transitions Index (WTI) covering employment status, occupation and working hours.
Time Frame
To document any changes in participant's employment status between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).
Title
Nature of work
Description
Using UK Standard Job Skill Classification (Job Skill Level 1-4): Main job title and industry working in.
Time Frame
To document any changes in participant's nature of work between time 0 (baseline), time 1 (3 months) and time 2 (6 months).

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria (Organisations) organisations in England organisations with 10 or more employees. Inclusion Criteria (Employee participants) working-age adults (employees) aged 18 and over self-reported chronic pain interfering with their ability to undertake or enjoy productive work able to comprehend English language able to provide informed consent. Exclusion Criteria (Organisations) organisations outside of England micro-organisations with fewer than 10 employees Exclusion Criteria (Employee participants) unemployed at recruitment under 18 years of age no chronic pain at recruitment unable to comprehend English language unable to provide informed consent
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Holly Blake, PhD
Phone
+(44)1158231049
Email
holly.blake@nottingham.ac.uk
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Holly Blake, PhD
Organizational Affiliation
University of Nottingham
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
University of Nottingham
City
Nottingham
ZIP/Postal Code
NG7 2HA
Country
United Kingdom
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Holly Blake, PhD
Phone
(+44)1158231049
Email
holly.blake@nottingham.ac.uk

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
Yes
IPD Sharing Plan Description
Protocol - details shared via clinical trials.gov and protocol manuscript (with informed consent form) to be submitted to an open access peer-reviewed journal within 6 months. Data Management Plan will be publicly available on https://dmponline.dcc.ac.uk prior to study start.
IPD Sharing Time Frame
Protocol - baseline (registration) 6 months (submitted protocol for publication) Statistical analysis plan - baseline Informed consent form - 6 months (submitted protocol for publication)
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
Protocol - details shared via clinical trials.gov and protocol manuscript (with informed consent form) to be submitted to an open access peer-reviewed journal within 6 months. Data Management Plan will be publicly available on https://dmponline.dcc.ac.uk prior to ethical approval and study start.
IPD Sharing URL
https://dmponline.dcc.ac.uk
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
35052220
Citation
Blake H, Somerset S, Greaves S. The Pain at Work Toolkit for Employees with Chronic or Persistent Pain: A Collaborative-Participatory Study. Healthcare (Basel). 2021 Dec 29;10(1):56. doi: 10.3390/healthcare10010056.
Results Reference
background
Links:
URL
https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/project/the-paw-trial-feasibility-and-acceptability-of-the-pain-at-work-toolkit
Description
Nuffield Foundation Research Funding (Award Ref: OBF/FR-000023820)

Learn more about this trial

Cluster Randomised Feasibility Trial of the Pain at Work Toolkit in Employees With Chronic Pain

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs