Core competencies for first contact physiotherapists in a direct access model of care for adults with musculoskeletal disorders: A scoping review

Clinical reasoning skills of German and Dutch manual therapists: a cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Reflective clinical reasoning (CR) is believed to play a crucial role in achieving an efficient therapy process, supported by evidence-based approaches that improve patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the CR process of German manual therapists (MTs) using the CR skills of Dutch MTs as a reference.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study evaluated the CR process and diagnostic ability of German MTs. Dutch MTs served as the reference standard due to their experience with direct access. The CR skills were assessed using the Diagnostic Thinking Inventory (DTI), a questionnaire measuring diagnostic competence. Descriptive and inferential statistics were conducted to compare the groups. Subgroup analyses were performed to analyze the influence of work experience (in years) and the level of education on CR.

RESULTS

396 manual therapists (229 German and 167 Dutch) completed the DTI. Dutch MTs revealed higher DTI sum-scores compared to German MTs (p < .001; Cohen´s d = .41). Subgroup analyses regarding professional education revealed no significant differences in DTI sum-scores within German MTs and between both groups. In the subgroup analyses regarding professional experience, differences of moderate effect size were reached between German and Dutch novice MTs (in favor of Dutch novice MTs; p = .001; Cohen´s d = .62), and between German novice MTs and experienced German MTs (in favor of experienced German MTs; p < .001; Cohen´s d = .6).

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that academically educated German and Dutch MTs as well as experienced German and Dutch MTs are similar in terms of their hypothetical-deductive CR skills. In turn, German novice MTs seem to use hypothetical-deductive processing to a lesser extent compared to Dutch novice MTs and experienced German MTs, which in turn may support the hypothesis that the level of professional experience and education has a significant impact on the development of hypothetical-deductive CR skills.

Physiotherapy-led care versus physician-led care for persons with low back pain: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To summarise the evidence on the effect of physiotherapy-led versus physician-led care on clinical outcomes, healthcare use, and costs in persons with low back pain.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Embase, and PEDro were systematically searched with the latest search performed in July 2024. Reference lists of articles were hand-searched.

REVIEW METHODS

Studies comparing clinical outcomes, healthcare use, or costs between adults with low back pain first consulting a physiotherapist and those first consulting a physician were included. Methodological quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Study design, clinical setting, patient characteristics, and group effects were extracted. Findings on outcomes assessed in two or more studies were synthesised narratively. Certainty of evidence was determined using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies comprising 1,481,980 persons with low back pain were included. Most studies were non-randomised retrospective or prospective cohort studies. In primary care (15 studies), consistent evidence, though of mostly very low certainty, indicated that physiotherapy-led care leads to higher patient satisfaction, less use of medication, injections and imaging, fewer physician's visits, lower total healthcare costs, and less sick leave compared to physician-led care, without increased harm. In emergency care (three studies), evidence of very low certainty showed that physiotherapy-led care leads to shorter waiting and treatment times, and fewer hospital admissions.

CONCLUSION

Physiotherapy-led care is a clinically, time- and cost-effective care pathway for low back pain, although the certainty of evidence was overall very low. Further high-quality research with a greater focus on clinical outcomes is warranted.

Required competencies for French physiotherapists for direct access to primary care for patients with musculoskeletal disorders: consensus statement based on a Delphi survey

BACKGROUND

Physiotherapists who will practice in direct access model of care must acquire the required competencies to ensure adequate and safe patient care. There is no set of required competencies for French physiotherapists.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a consensus on a minimum set of competencies that French physiotherapists should acquire to practice in direct access to primary care with patients with musculoskeletal disorders.

METHODS

The survey was conducted by 1) definition of an initial set of competencies based on a scoping review up to September 2021, 2) implementation of a two-round Delphi survey from October 2021 to January 2022 to obtain consensus on the domains and competencies required in the French context, and 3) consultation at group meeting on February 2022 to finalize and validate the final set of competencies.

RESULTS

Five domains and 52 competencies were identified from the scoping review. Twenty health-care professionals' experts (i.e. family physicians, emergency physicians, and physiotherapists) and two health-care users took part in the Delphi survey. A consensus was reached on 27 required competencies grouped within five domains.

CONCLUSION

A consensus-based, contemporary set of competencies required for direct access practice with patients with musculoskeletal disorders has been identified that may contribute to the update of entry-level and lifelong learning curricula for French physiotherapists.