Utilisation of outcome measures in the management of non-specific neck pain: A national survey of current physiotherapy practice in the UK

Characteristics of exercise and rehabilitation intervention clinical trials registered with Clinical Research Information Service: a review

Exercise and rehabilitation interventions are essential for health restoration, yet reviews on related clinical trials remain limited despite increasing research interest. This study analyzed the characteristics, designs, sample sizes, and outcome variables of clinical trials registered with the Clinical Research Information Service in South Korea, focusing on exercise and rehabilitation interventions. A systematic search using "exercise" and "rehabilitation" identified 1,089 trials registered up to June 9, 2024, with 470 meeting the inclusion criteria. Most studies (79.79%) were retrospectively registered, and 45.11% were open-label trials. Behavioral interventions (26.60%) and medical devices (22.34%) were most common, targeting circulatory (27.45%) and musculoskeletal (19.79%) conditions. Frequently assessed outcomes included 'balance,' 'pain,' and 'walking.' A notable increase in trials was observed since 2017. However, the high proportion of retrospective registrations and open-label designs highlights the need for more prospective and blinded trials to enhance research quality.

Current use of patient-reported outcome measures by musculoskeletal physiotherapists in Portugal

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal conditions are the leading cause of disability, requiring continuous outcome measurement, including the utilization of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

OBJECTIVE

The aims of the study were a) to characterize the use PROMs by Portuguese physiotherapists in patients with musculoskeletal conditions; b) to analyze the associated factors of their use and; c) to identify the barriers and facilitators to their implementation.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was carried out with musculoskeletal physiotherapists working in Portugal. Closed questions were used to describe the use of PROMs. The factors associated with the non-use of PROMs were analysed through logistic regression models (p= 0.05). Barriers and facilitators were assessed through open questions and analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-six physiotherapists answered the online survey. Most physiotherapists do not use outcome measures consistently and physical tests are often chosen (70.5%) over PROMs (17.3%). The work sector (p= 0.01; p= 0.015; p= 0.009). the workplace stimulus (p= 0.001) and the physiotherapists' knowledge about PROMs (p= 0.017) were identified as factors associated with the non-use of PROMs. Barriers and facilitators to the use of PROMs are related to physiotherapists' skills, the patients' characteristics, the workplace conditions, and the instruments' characteristics.

CONCLUSION

This study showed the poor use of PROMs by musculoskeletal physiotherapists and identified the associated factors, barriers, and facilitators that should be considered to increase its future use by musculoskeletal physiotherapists in Portugal.

A Survey on the Use of Outcome Measures during Physical Therapy Interventions by Physical Therapists in Korea

The purpose of this study was to determine the current status of patient care provided by Korean physical therapists (KPTs) in clinical practice by studying the outcome measures (OMs) used in physical therapy interventions among KPTs with experience in treating patients. A total of 225 KPTs with experience in treating patients in clinical settings participated in the study and completed the online questionnaire. The questionnaire included questions about the use of OMs and the reasons for using them, as well as the types, benefits, and barriers of OMs. The participants' responses were analyzed and reported in terms of frequencies and percentages. A total of 220 questionnaires were analyzed. The results show that the majority of KPTs in clinical practice used OMs during interventions. The main reasons for using OMs were to check the patient's condition and to determine the direction and effectiveness of treatment. In terms of the types of OMs used, the highest percentage of subjects used both patient-reported OMs (PROMs) and performance-based OMs (PBOMs). They chose OMs that were quick and easy to use and used them voluntarily. Barriers to and reasons for not using OMs were similar, including lack of benefits, lack of time, and problems with patient performance and uncooperative behavior. When analyzing the effect of demographic characteristics on the use of OMs, we found that physical therapists specializing in musculoskeletal and neurological systems, physical therapists with longer treatment times, and physical therapists who valued OMs were more likely to use them. Based on the results of this study, it is recommended that improvements in the work environment and healthcare system are needed to enhance the professionalism of KPTs working in the field of physical agent therapy by improving their awareness of Oms and improving the quality of physical therapy interventions.

Functional scales used by the Egyptian physiotherapist in the assessment of low back pain: a cross-sectional study

Background

The use of functional scales is crucial for the management of low back pain. Numerous pertinent outcome measures are available; however, it is unknown how much use Egyptian physiotherapists make of these scales and measurements when diagnosing and treating patients with low back pain.

Aim

The purpose of this study was to investigate how Egyptian physical therapists working in Egypt used functional outcome measures and scales when treating low back pain.

Design and methods

A cross-section study used an online web-based survey which was accessible to all Egyptian physiotherapists practicing in Egypt.

Results

334 Egyptian physical therapists participated in this study. The use of the pain disability index and back pain functional scale represents the highest frequency of (always/often) of 56.3% and 53.6% respectively, whereas the use of the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale or the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire represents the highest frequency of (rarely/never) 45.8% and 53%, respectively. There was no significant association between gender, years of experience, educational level, and work setting with the use of functional outcome measures (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Egyptian physiotherapists more usually utilize the pain disability index and back pain functional scale (PDI and BPFS), when evaluating their patients with low back pain, although they did not commonly use the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire or the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale

Experiences of physiotherapists regarding a standard set of measurement instruments to improve quality of care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a mixed methods study

RATIONALE

The quality of physiotherapy care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can be improved by comparing outcomes of care in practice.

AIM

To evaluate the experiences of physiotherapists implementing a standard set of measurement instruments to measure outcomes and improve the quality of care for patients with COPD.

METHODS

This sequential explanatory mixed methods study was performed in two parts. In the quantitative part, a survey of 199 physiotherapists was conducted to evaluate their attitudes and knowledge, as well as the influence of contextual factors (i.e., practice policy and support from colleagues), in the implementation of the standard measurement set. In the qualitative part, 11 physiotherapists participated in individual interviews to elucidate their experiences using a thematical framework.

RESULTS

The survey showed that, on average, 68.4% of the physiotherapists reported having a positive attitude about using the standard set, 85.0% felt they had sufficient knowledge of the measurement instruments, and 84.7% felt supported by practice policy and colleagues. In total, 80.3% of physiotherapists thought the standard set had added value in clinical practice, and 90.3% indicated that the measurement instruments can be valuable for evaluating treatment outcomes. The physiotherapists mentioned several barriers, such as lack of time and the unavailability of the entire standard set of measurement instruments in their practice. Moreover, the physiotherapists indicated that the measurement instruments have added value in providing transparency to policymakers through the anonymized publication of outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Physiotherapists support the use of the standard set of measurement instruments to improve the quality of physiotherapy treatment for patients with COPD.