Background. Chronic pain is a significant burden and represents a major issue for world healthcare systems. Interventions include medication, surgery, pain management programmes, and social support through peer support groups. These groups are often informal, providing informational, emotional, and social support to members. The aim of this project is to co-produce guidance on how to establish a peer support programme for people living with chronic, non-cancer pain that is informed by evidence, theory, and stakeholder experience. Methods. This project is using Steps 1–4 of the Intervention Mapping (IM) approach to inform the research. Online workshops consisting of people living with chronic pain, third sector representatives, healthcare professionals, and researchers are being used to co-produce the guidance. Results. To date, 2 of the 4 planned workshops have been conducted. These have identified the needs of people living with chronic pain, goals for the peer support programme, and expectations of how a peer support programme should be executed. Topics for inclusion in the programme and their content have been identified, with further workshops to refine this planned. The final stage of this project will identify methods of delivery, specific resources that should be developed, and the training to be provided to peer support volunteers. Conclusion. The project has identified the diverse needs of people living with chronic pain and how these may be addressed by a peer support programme. It has identified flexible options that can be recommended to those who want to set up a programme and a variety content that may be included. Conflicts of Interest. None. Sources of Funding. Robert Gordon University

Purpose. This research project explored the experiences, attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions of healthcare professionals (physiotherapists and orthopaedic surgeons) and people with chronic low back pain (CLBP) regarding the barriers and facilitators to activity normalisation following physiotherapy. Methods. A qualitative study of the perspectives of patients, physiotherapists and orthopaedic surgeons on CLBP was undertaken in Saudi Arabia. One focus group discussion was conducted with seven patients who had received physiotherapy for CLBP, along with one focus group discussion with eight physiotherapists and seven individual interviews with orthopaedic surgeons. The focus group discussions and interviews were transcribed and analysed using framework analysis. Results. We identified seven factors facilitating or hindering activity normalisation following physiotherapy: symptom control, patient education and awareness, adherence to treatment plan, psychosocial factors, role of the clinician, social support, and issues relating to the healthcare system. Conclusion. Clinicians stressed the importance of exercise and regular activity in spite of pain as an important factor hindering activity normalisation. Patients appreciated reassurance and advice from clinicians but also noted that conflicting and ambiguous advice and diagnosis was common. This may contribute to poor adherence with advice and exercise. Fear of pain and recurrence of injury were highlighted as important factors hindering activity normalisation, particularly since some patients did not take active steps to control pain. Finally, whilst multidisciplinary teams may support patient recovery and activity normalisation, this is often expensive and intensive and may be beyond the reach of a healthcare system without a properly functioning referral system and insufficient specialised clinics and physicians. Conflicts of interest: None. Sources of funding: This research was supported through a PhD scholarship from Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia, at the University of Nottingham, United Kingdom