Ania Kania, RMT, BSc*; Marja J. Verhoef, PhD*; Trish Dryden, RMT,
MEd†; Mark A. Ware, MD, MRCP(UK),
MSc‡
Department of Community Health Sciences,* University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada; Applied Research
Center, Centennial College,† Toronto, ON, Canada; Department of
Anesthesia,‡ McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
One of the most commonly used complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) modalities in North America is massage therapy (MT). Research to date indicates many potential health benefits of MT, suggesting that ongoing research efforts to further elucidate and substantiate preliminary findings within the massage profession should be given high priority. Central to the development of a sound evidence base for MT are the use of valid, reliable, and relevant outcome measures in research, and practice in assessing the effectiveness of MT. The purpose of the present article is to introduce MT researchers and massage therapists interested in using outcome measures in research and clinical practice to the IN-CAM Outcomes Database website by describing the Outcomes Database and identifying its utility in MT research and practice. The IN-CAM Outcomes Database is a centralized location where information on outcome measures is collected and made accessible to users. Outcome measures are organized in the database within the Framework of Outcome Domains. The Framework includes health domains relevant to conventional medicine and CAM alike, and health domains that have been identified as important to CAM interventions. Users of the website may search for information on a specific outcome measure, plan research projects, and engage in discussions related to outcomes assessment in the CAM field with other users and with members of the CAM research community. As the MT profession continues to evolve and move toward evidence-informed practice, the IN-CAM Outcomes Database website can be a valuable resource for MT researchers and massage therapists.
KEYWORDS: Massage therapy, research, practice, health outcomes, outcomes database
One of the most commonly used complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) modalities in North America is massage therapy (MT)(1,2). Increasingly, MT is part of a comprehensive treatment approach in various health care settings, from private health clinics to hospitals. Massage therapy is used for a wide range of health-related reasons—from treatment of various symptoms and conditions to prevention and health maintenance(3–5). Research to date indicates many potential health benefits of MT, suggesting that ongoing research efforts to further elucidate and substantiate preliminary findings within the massage profession should be given high priority.
Central to the development of a sound evidence base for MT are the use of valid, reliable, and relevant outcome measures in research, and practice in evaluating massage therapy interventions. Currently, the outcome measures used in both the health and the social sciences are many and varied. They also vary widely in terms of target outcome, length, format, target population, and degree of specificity(6). A number of resources have been developed to provide overviews of outcome measures—for example, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and the Patient-Reported Outcome and Quality of Life Instruments Database (PROQOLID)—but these resources often lack the types of outcomes that are relevant to CAM interventions. Furthermore, knowledge of, access to, and time required in searching for appropriate outcome measures is often a barrier to the implementation of outcome measures, particularly in practice settings. The development of the IN-CAM Outcomes Database (the Database) (http://www.outcomesdatabase.org ) aims to address this gap. Because MT is currently classified as a CAM modality(7), the purpose of the present article is to introduce MT researchers and massage therapists interested in using outcome measures in research and clinical practice to the IN-CAM Outcomes Database website by
The Canadian Interdisciplinary Network for Complementary and Alternative Medicine Research (IN-CAM) is an interdisciplinary network of researchers, practitioners, educators, and policymakers interested in advancing the field of CAM and integrative health care research. Its primary aims(8) are
In 2005, at an IN-CAM strategic planning meeting, it was determined that easier access to a wide range of outcomes relevant to CAM research was a priority issue(9). In response, the open-access IN-CAM Outcomes Database was created(10). The Database is designed to be a resource for researchers and practitioners in CAM fields such as MT on outcome measures, and a forum in which issues related to outcome measures and assessment of CAM outcomes can be communicated and discussed.
The Database is a centralized location in which information concerning outcomes measures is collected and made accessible to users. Information on each outcome measure includes
Ideally, only well-designed, valid, and reliable measures are used in research and practice. Therefore, if an outcome measure has been psychometrically tested, the key psychometric references are provided. To facilitate comparisons of findings across studies, references for CAM studies that have used the outcome measure are also provided. It is the responsibility of the user of the Database to be familiar with the qualities and characteristics that are required of an outcome measure and how to appraise those aspects of a measure so as to select the most appropriate measure for the project at hand. To assist users in this process, particularly novice researchers or practitioners undertaking research within their practices, a Glossary of Terms and commentary on Attributes of a Good Outcome Measure are available on the Database website.
All outcome measures in the Database are categorized or classified within the Framework of Outcome Domains (Fig. 1). During the development of the IN-CAM Outcomes Database, a need became apparent not only to create a central access point for information on outcome measures, but to also to categorize outcome measures within a framework that captures the various health domains that are relevant to CAM interventions and the components that affect the effectiveness of care provided.
| Figure 1. Framework of Outcome Domains from the IN-CAM Outcomes Database. | ||
The Framework of Outcome Domains has 9 domains (Fig. 1, Table 1). Of these 9 domains, 4 (physical, psychological, social, and quality of life) contain outcomes that are relevant in conventional medicine as well as CAM. However, given the distinct healing philosophies and outcomes of CAM interventions, it was recognized that a broader range of outcome measures had to be considered. Therefore, 5 additional domains were identified as unique and important to CAM and were included in the Framework.
| Table 1. Domains Incorporated into the Framework of Outcome Domains |
Spiritual Health
Spiritual health or well-being is often distinguished from physical and emotional health, and is acknowledged in many CAM practices as an important component of health.
Holistic
The holistic domain represents a global level of well-being, reflecting a unique outcome that cannot be calculated by summing outcomes in the physical, psychological, social, and quality of life domains.
Individualized
The individualized domain does not include measures with outcomes that are predefined or specified in advance. Rather, the outcomes are defined based on concerns or treatment goals identified by the individual receiving the intervention. Although these goals may fit into any or all of the other domains, individualized outcomes tend to be highly specific to the individual and are combined in ways that differ from the outcomes identified in the other domains; it is the patient rather than the investigator who decides how these outcomes should be expressed.
The unique nature of such outcomes has been recognized in the literature, and several relevant outcome measures have been developed. For example, the Measure Your Own Medical Profile (MYMOP) is an individualized ("patient-generated") instrument that aims to measure the outcomes that the patient has identified as being most important(11–13). Health care interventions do not occur in isolation.
Context and Process of the Intervention
It is recognized that the effectiveness or impact
of an intervention is affected (directly or indirectly)
by the processes and the context of the
intervention.
Therefore, although process and context of an
intervention are not outcomes per se, they have an
important effect on outcomes. As such, they are included
in the Framework and situated so as to represent the
concept that all outcomes in any of the other domains
are influenced by process and
context(6).
As noted earlier, given the unique health perspective and attributes of CAM interventions, there is a need to consider a broader range of outcome measures so as to capture the outcomes of those interventions. Therefore, in addition to conventional health outcome measures that are appropriate to CAM research, a key goal of the Database is to highlight and include outcome measures that are specific to CAM interventions and that are developed to measure concepts that have been identified as important outcomes of CAM interventions, such as transformation and unstuckness. For example, specific to the MT field, Moyer and Rounds developed the Attitudes Towards Massage (ATOM) scale(14). The ATOM scale aims to assess the overall attitude of individuals toward massage based on two key attitudes: massage as "helpful," and massage as "pleasant." An example of an outcome measure currently under development aimed at measuring the concept of transformation is the Measure Your Own Transformative Outcome Profile (by Sutherland and Ritenbaugh)(16). This outcome measure assesses the effect and duration of an intervention on transformative change experienced by the participant. Although this measure is not yet available, it is an example of the work being undertaken by researchers to develop standardized ways of measuring important outcomes of CAM interventions.
Searching for an Outcome Measure
The Database can be accessed four ways to find a specific outcome measure. If the name of the outcome measure is known, then the measure can be located by browsing alphabetically (Fig. 2). The quick search (Fig. 3) and advanced search (Fig. 4) functions can be used to find an outcome measure based on keywords, a title, or specific information about the measure. Browsing by domain generates and displays a list of outcome measures applicable and relevant to that domain (Fig. 5).
| Figure 2. Browsing alphabetically for outcome measures in the IN-CAM Outcomes Database. | ||
| Figure 3. Using the quick search function to find outcome measures in the IN-CAM Outcomes Database. | ||
| Figure 4. Using the advanced search function to find outcome measures in the IN-CAM Outcomes Database. | ||
| Figure 5. Browsing by domain for outcome measures in the IN-CAM Outcomes Database. | ||
In Table 2, a practice-based scenario shows how the Database website can be used to locate an outcome measure of interest.
| Table 2 Example: Searching for Relevant Outcome Measures |
| Figure 6. Information on outcome measures provided in the IN-CAM Outcomes Database under (A) "basic" and (B) "extended" details. | ||
Not all outcome measures are designed to be used in the same way. Clinical outcome measures are intended to assess the effectiveness of an intervention at the individual level; research outcome measures are designed to determine effectiveness at the population level. Some outcome measures require that the person administering the measure have specific qualifications. For example, it is recommended that the COOP Wonca Charts, used to measure functional capacity, be administered by a nurse, physician, or medical assistant(19). Interpretation or analysis of scores obtained from responses to items or questions in the outcome measures may also require specific credentials.
To ensure relevance to massage practice, it is important that all items or questions in the outcome measure be reviewed before administration. Although issues related to the decision-making process in the selection of appropriate outcome measures are beyond the scope of this article, practitioners and researchers need to take into consideration these distinctions and ensure that a given outcome measure is relevant in context of their clinical practice or research project.
Broadly, research outcomes are those that help to assess the effectiveness of an intervention at a population level. Clinical outcomes help to assess the effectiveness of an intervention for an individual patient. Some measures are designed for diagnostic purposes to help identify health problems in a clinical setting (for example, the Beck Depression Inventory), but may also be used to establish inclusion criteria in a research setting. Other measures are used almost exclusively to determine the effectiveness of an intervention in a research capacity (the Profile of Mood States, for instance). Health care workers who are not involved in research should be aware of the measure type so that they can interpret research findings for clinical relevance. To ensure clinical relevance, researchers should know the strengths, limitations, and validity of the tools used in their studies.
A useful organizational tool, the Framework is also effective for raising awareness of the various domains through which CAM interventions affect the multiple dimensions of an individual's life and health. Research evaluating CAM interventions often requires the selection of a range of outcome measures to capture the complexity and individualized nature of the intervention. Hence, the Framework can be used as a conceptual framework to facilitate or assist in the planning of a research study by presenting all of the relevant domains that could be considered to fully assess the effectiveness or impact of an intervention.
Table 3 presents a research-oriented scenario that may be applicable to a researcher developing a study or to a massage therapist undertaking practice-based research (a case study or case series) to document the effects of MT.
| Table 3 Example: Applying the Framework to Research |
In addition to being an information resource on outcome measures, the IN-CAM Outcomes Database website has been designed to be an interactive tool. Several features have been built into the website to facilitate the exchange and dissemination of ideas, findings, and information related to outcomes assessment in CAM field. Discussions on topics of interest related to outcomes assessment and CAM can be initiated by users on the Discussion Board. For example, a massage therapist finds that many of her clients report a sense of "lightness" after a massage. She is not sure what this means, why it may be important to the clients, or how to effectively capture the experience. To highlight this unique outcome and to obtain feedback or ideas on potentially useful outcome measures to adequately assess it, she could start a discussion thread on the Discussion Board, engaging other practitioners and researchers in this exploratory phase. This exploration may lead not only to a discussion about identifying new and relevant outcomes in the massage field, but also to further exploration by researchers and, potentially, to the development of a new outcome measure.
Users also have an opportunity to post comments and a rating for each outcome measure in the Database. Users are invited to post comments and provide personal ratings of outcome measures based on their experience with those specific measures in research or practice. A common rating of outcome measures or their psychometric qualities is not provided through the Database website.
The Database will continue to be populated with relevant outcome measures as those measures are identified and developed. Members of the CAM research and practice community are therefore invited to contribute to the resources made available in the Database by submitting outcome measures through the Suggest an Outcome Measure feature of the website. All submissions are reviewed by an internal review committee for appropriateness. If accepted, the measure and its related information will be posted within 1 month of submission.
The use of outcome measures is an essential part of any type of activity that aims to evaluate a treatment or a health care intervention. As the MT profession continues to evolve and move toward evidence-informed practice, the application of outcome measures in research and practice is becoming increasingly important. It is imperative that massage therapists recognize that statements such as "that felt good" or "I feel better" from a client after a massage intervention is not enough to determine or measure the effect of the MT intervention. Although personal statements may be a starting point, identifying and using relevant outcomes is crucial in capturing client responses in a standardized way. An understanding of outcome measures, how they are applied in research and in practice, and which ones are relevant to MT practice is therefore also crucial. Research on massage interventions has to incorporate not only appropriate outcome measures, but also the range of health domains relevant to MT so as to fully explore and capture the outcomes of MT interventions. To that end, the IN-CAM Outcomes Database website is a valuable resource that can assist MT researchers and massage therapists in identifying relevant and appropriate outcome measures, in obtaining access information for outcome measures, in conceptualizing research questions and studies, and in communicating with various stakeholders within the CAM research and practice community.
The author declares that there are no conflicts of interest.
Published under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License.
1. Esmail N. Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Canada: Trends in Use and Public Attitudes, 1997–2006. Public Policy Sources series, no. 87. A Fraser Institute occasional paper. Vancouver, BC: Fraser Institute; 2007: 3–53.
2. Barnes PM, Bloom B, Nahrin RL. Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use Among Adults and Children: United States, 2007. CDC National Health Statistics Report no. 12. Hyattsville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. http:/ /nccam.nih.gov/news/2008/nhsr12.pdf. Accessed January 29, 2009.
3. Furlan AD, Brosseau L, Imamura M, Irvin E. Massage for low-back pain: a systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine. 2002;27(17):1896–1910.
4. Ezzo J, Haraldsson BG, Gross AR, Myers CD, Morien A, Goldsmith CH, et al. on behalf of the Cervical Overview Group. Massage for mechanical neck disorders: a systematic review. Spine. 2007;32(3):353–362.
5. Moyer CA, Rounds J, Hannum JW. A meta-analysis of massage therapy research. Psychol Bull. 2004;130(1):3–18.
6. Verhoef MJ, Vanderheyden LC, Dryden T, Mallory D, Ware MA. Evaluating complementary and alternative medicine interventions: in search of appropriate patient-centered outcome measures. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2006;6(Nov 21):6–38.
7. United States, National Institutes of Health, National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM). Health Info > What is CAM? NCCAM website. http://nccam.nih.gov/health/whatiscam/overview.htm . Updated February 26, 2009. Accessed February 27, 2009.
8. Canadian Interdisciplinary Network for Complementary and Alternative Medicine Research (IN-CAM). About Us > Mission & Objectives. IN-CAM website. http://www.incamresearch.ca/index.php?id=12,0,0,1,0,0&menu=1. Updated February 18, 2009. Accessed February 27, 2009.
9. Verhoef MJ, Ware M, Dryden T, Gignac P, Weeks L, Kania A, et al. Getting the measures you need: the IN-CAM Outcomes Database. Focus Altern Complement Med Ther. 2007;12:170–171.
10. IN-CAM Outcomes Database. IN-CAM Outcomes Database > Welcome [home page]. IN-CAM Outcomes Database website. http://www.outcomesdatabase.org . Published n.d. Accessed February 2, 2009.
11. MYMOP (Measure Your Own Medical Profile). Welcome to MYMOP [home page]. MYMOP website. http://www.pms.ac.uk/mymop/. Published n.d. Accessed January 29, 2009.
12. Paterson C. Measuring outcomes in primary care: a patient generated measure, MYMOP, compared with the SF-36 health survey. BMJ. 1996;312(7037):1016–1020.
13. Paterson C, Britten N. In pursuit of patient-centred outcomes: a qualitative evaluation of the "Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile." J Health Serv Res Policy. 2000;5(1):27–36.
14. Moyer CA, Rounds J. The Attitudes Toward Massage (ATOM) scale: reliability, validity, and associated findings. J Bodyw Move Ther. 2009;13(1):22–33.
15. IN-CAM Outcomes Database. IN-CAM Outcomes Database > View Instrument > Measure Your Transformative Outcome Profile (MYTOP). IN-CAM Outcomes Database website. http://www.outcomesdatabase.org/show/element/id/274 . Published n.d. Accessed January 29, 2009.
16. Brantley PJ, Waggoner CD, Jones GN, Rappaport NB. A Daily Stress Inventory: development, reliability, and validity. J Behav Med. 1987;10(1):61–74.
17. Bell IR, Cunningham V, Caspi O, Meek P, Ferro L. Development and validation of a new global well-being outcomes rating scale for integrative medicine research. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2004;4(Jan 15):1.
18. Hattie JA, Myers JE, Sweeney TJ. A factor structure of wellness: theory, assessment, analysis, and practice. J Couns Dev. 2004;82(3):354–364.
19. IN-CAM Outcomes Database. IN-CAM Outcomes Database > View Instrument > COOP Wonca Charts. IN-CAM Outcomes Database website. http://www.outcomesdatabase.org/show/element/id/481 . Published n.d. Accessed February 5, 2009.
20. Mercer SW, Maxwell M, Heaney D, Watt GC. The Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) measure: development and preliminary validation and reliability of an empathy-based consultation process measure. Fam Pract. 2004;21(6):699–705.
21. Bishop FL, Yardley L, Lewith G. Developing a measure of treatment beliefs: the Complementary and Alternative Medicine Beliefs Inventory. Complement Ther Med. 2005;13(2):144–149.
Corresponding author: Ania Kania,University
of Calgary, Department of Community Health
Sciences, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Room G-26,Calgary,
AB T2N 4N1 Canada.
E-mail: akania@ucalgary.ca
International Journal of Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork—Volume 2, Number 1, March 2009