Physiotherapy - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Design, Delivery, Maintenance, and Outcomes of Peer-to-Peer Online Support Groups for People With Chronic Musculoskeletal Disorders: Systematic Review
    Maclachlan, LR ; Mills, K ; Lawford, BJ ; Egerton, T ; Setchell, J ; Hall, LM ; Plinsinga, ML ; Besomi, M ; Teo, PL ; Eyles, JP ; Mellor, R ; Melo, L ; Robbins, S ; Hodges, PW ; Hunter, DJ ; Vicenzino, B ; Bennell, KL (JMIR PUBLICATIONS, INC, 2020-04-24)
    BACKGROUND: Online support groups (OSGs) are one way for people with chronic diseases, their family or friends, and health professionals to communicate, gain information, and provide social support. As the number of peer-to-peer OSGs for chronic musculoskeletal conditions grows, it is important to gain insight into the different designs of groups available, who is accessing them, if and how they may be effective, and what strategies are being used to implement or increase consumer engagement. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this systematic review of people with musculoskeletal conditions were to (1) describe the design features (functions, usage options, moderation, and expert input) of peer-to-peer OSGs, (2) describe the characteristics of the individuals using peer-to-peer OSGs, (3) synthesize the evidence on outcomes of participation, and (4) identify strategies used in the delivery and maintenance of OSGs. METHODS: A search comprising terms related to the population (people with musculoskeletal disorders) and the intervention (peer-to-peer OSGs) was conducted in 6 databases. Results were filtered from 1990 (internet inception) to February 2019. Studies identified in the search were screened according to predefined eligibility criteria using a 2-step process. Quantitative studies were appraised by 2 reviewers using the Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tool. Qualitative studies were appraised by 2 different reviewers using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Extracted data were synthesized narratively. RESULTS: We examined 21 studies with low to moderate risk of bias. Of these studies, 13 studies included OSGs hosted on public platforms, 11 studies examined OSGs that were conducted in English, and 6 studies used moderators or peer leaders to facilitate engagement. Studies either reported the number of OSG members (n=1985 across all studies) or the number of posts (range: 223-200,000). The majority of OSG members were females who were not full-time employees and with varied levels of education. There were no randomized controlled trials measuring the efficacy of OSGs. Qualitative and quantitative studies identified empowerment, social support, self-management behavior, and health literacy as primary constructs to measure OSG efficacy. Neutral or marginal improvement was reported in these constructs. Sharing experiences and a greater level of engagement appeared to have an important influence on OSGs efficacy. The extent to which members posted on the website influenced engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Across a diverse range of designs, languages, included features, and delivery platforms, peer-to-peer OSGs for chronic musculoskeletal conditions attract predominantly female participants of all ages and education levels. The level of participation of a member appears to be related to their perceived benefit, health literacy, and empowerment. Future studies are needed to identify which design and maintenance strategies have superior efficacy and whether there are concomitant improvements in health outcomes for people with chronic musculoskeletal conditions resulting from participation in OSGs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42018090326; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018090326.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Patient-reported quality indicators to evaluate physiotherapy care for hip and/or knee osteoarthritis- development and evaluation of the QUIPA tool.
    Teo, PL ; Hinman, RS ; Egerton, T ; Dziedzic, KS ; Kasza, J ; Bennell, KL ( 2020-03-16)
    Abstract Background: There is no physiotherapy-specific quality indicator tool available to evaluate physiotherapy care for people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to develop a patient-reported quality indicator tool (QUIPA) for physiotherapy management of hip and knee OA and to assess its reliability and validity. Methods: To develop the QUIPA tool, quality indicators were initially developed based on clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy practice and those of an existing generic OA quality indicator tool. Draft items were then further refined using patient focus groups. Test-retest reliability, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and criterion validity were then evaluated. Sixty-five people with hip and/or knee OA attended a single physiotherapy consultation and completed the QUIPA tool one, twelve- and thirteen-weeks after. Physiotherapists (n=9) completed the tool post-consultation. Patient test-retest reliability was assessed between weeks twelve and thirteen. Construct validity was assessed with three predefined hypotheses and criterion validity was based on agreement between physiotherapists and participants at week one. Results: A draft list of 23 clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy was developed. Following feedback from three patient focus groups, the final QUIPA tool contained 18 items (three subscales) expressed in lay language. The test-retest reliability estimates (Cohen’s Kappa) for single items ranged from 0.30-0.83 with observed agreement of 64-94%. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the Assessment and Management Planning subscale was 0.70 (0.54, 0.81), Core Recommended Treatments subscale was 0.84 (0.75, 0.90), Adjunctive Treatments subscale was 0.70 (0.39, 0.87) and for the total QUIPA score was 0.80 (0.69, 0.88). All predefined hypotheses regarding construct validity were confirmed. However, agreement between physiotherapists and participants for single items showed large measurement error (Cohen’s Kappa estimates ranged from -0.04-0.59) with the ICC (95% CI) for the total score being 0.11 (-0.14, 0.34). Conclusions: The QUIPA tool showed acceptable test-retest reliability for subscales and total score but inadequate reliability for individual items. Construct validity was confirmed but criterion validity for individual items, subscales and the total score was inadequate. Further research is needed to refine the QUIPA tool to improve its clinimetric properties before implementation.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Patient-reported quality indicators to evaluate physiotherapy care for hip and/or knee osteoarthritis- development and evaluation of the QUIPA tool.
    Teo, PL ; Hinman, RS ; Egerton, T ; Dziedzic, KS ; Kasza, J ; Bennell, KL ( 2020-01-31)
    Abstract Background: There is no physiotherapy-specific quality indicator tool available to evaluate physiotherapy care for people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to develop a patient-reported quality indicator tool (QUIPA) for physiotherapy management of hip and knee OA and to assess its reliability and validity. Methods: To develop the QUIPA tool, quality indicators were initially developed based on clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy practice and those of an existing generic OA quality indicator tool. Draft items were then further refined using patient focus groups. Test-retest reliability, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and criterion validity were then evaluated. Sixty-five people with hip and/or knee OA attended a single physiotherapy consultation and completed the QUIPA tool one, twelve- and thirteen-weeks after. Physiotherapists (n=9) completed the tool post-consultation. Patient test-retest reliability was assessed between weeks twelve and thirteen. Construct validity was assessed with three predefined hypotheses and criterion validity was based on agreement between physiotherapists and participants at week one. Results: A draft list of 23 clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy was developed. Following feedback from three patient focus groups, the final QUIPA tool contained 18 items (three subscales) expressed in lay language. The test-retest reliability estimates (Cohen’s Kappa) for single items ranged from 0.30-0.83 with observed agreement of 64-94%. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the Assessment and Management Planning subscale was 0.70 (0.54, 0.81), Core Recommended Treatments subscale was 0.84 (0.75, 0.90), Adjunctive Treatments subscale was 0.70 (0.39, 0.87) and for the total QUIPA score was 0.80 (0.69, 0.88). All predefined hypotheses regarding construct validity were confirmed. However, agreement between physiotherapists and participants for single items showed large measurement error (Cohen’s Kappa estimates ranged from -0.04-0.59) with the ICC (95% CI) for the total score being 0.11 (-0.14, 0.34). Conclusions: The QUIPA tool showed acceptable test-retest reliability for subscales and total score but inadequate reliability for individual items. Construct validity was confirmed but criterion validity for individual items, subscales and the total score was inadequate. Further research is needed to refine the QUIPA tool to improve its clinimetric properties before implementation.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Exploring Attitudes and Experiences of People With Knee Osteoarthritis Toward a Self-Directed eHealth Intervention to Support Exercise: Qualitative Study.
    Nelligan, RK ; Hinman, RS ; Teo, PL ; Bennell, KL (JMIR Publications Inc., 2020-11-26)
    BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a highly prevalent and debilitating condition. Exercise is a recommended treatment because of its effectiveness at improving pain and function. However, exercise is underutilized in OA management. Difficulty accessing health care has been identified as a key barrier to exercise uptake. Innovative and scalable methods of delivering exercise treatments to people with knee OA are needed. We developed a self-directed eHealth intervention to enable and encourage exercise participation. The effectiveness of this intervention on pain and function in people with knee OA is being evaluated in a randomized clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the attitudes and experiences of people with knee OA who accessed the self-directed eHealth intervention and the features perceived as useful to facilitate self-directed exercise. METHODS: This was a qualitative study embedded within a randomized controlled trial. Individual, semistructured phone interviews were conducted with 16 people with knee OA who had accessed a 24-week eHealth intervention (website and behavior change SMS program) designed to support exercise participation. Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analyzed using an inductive approach. RESULTS: Five themes arose: (1) technology easy to use and follow (website ease of use, SMS ease of use), (2) facilitators to exercise participation (credible OA and exercise information, website features, prescribed exercises simple to do unsupervised, freedom to adapt the exercise to suit needs, influence of other health care experiences), (3) sense of support and accountability (SMS good reminder and prompt, accountable, SMS tone and automation could trigger negative emotions [eg, guilt or shame], inability to contact someone when needed), (4) positive outcomes (knee symptom improvements, confidence to self-manage, encouraged active living), (5) suggestions for real-world application (provided by a health professional preferred, should be provided at subsidized or low out-of-pocket cost). CONCLUSIONS: People with knee OA had mostly positive experiences with and attitudes towards the use of an eHealth intervention that supported exercise participation independent of a health professional. A human connection associated with the eHealth intervention appeared important.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Patient-reported quality indicators to evaluate physiotherapy care for hip and/or knee osteoarthritis- development and evaluation of the QUIPA tool
    Teo, PL ; Hinman, RS ; Egerton, T ; Dziedzic, KS ; Kasza, J ; Bennell, KL (BMC, 2020-04-01)
    BACKGROUND: There is no physiotherapy-specific quality indicator tool available to evaluate physiotherapy care for people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to develop a patient-reported quality indicator tool (QUIPA) for physiotherapy management of hip and knee OA and to assess its reliability and validity. METHODS: To develop the QUIPA tool, quality indicators were initially developed based on clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy practice and those of an existing generic OA quality indicator tool. Draft items were then further refined using patient focus groups. Test-retest reliability, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and criterion validity were then evaluated. Sixty-five people with hip and/or knee OA attended a single physiotherapy consultation and completed the QUIPA tool one, twelve- and thirteen-weeks after. Physiotherapists (n = 9) completed the tool post-consultation. Patient test-retest reliability was assessed between weeks twelve and thirteen. Construct validity was assessed with three predefined hypotheses and criterion validity was based on agreement between physiotherapists and participants at week one. RESULTS: A draft list of 23 clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy was developed. Following feedback from three patient focus groups, the final QUIPA tool contained 18 items (three subscales) expressed in lay language. The test-retest reliability estimates (Cohen's Kappa) for single items ranged from 0.30-0.83 with observed agreement of 64-94%. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the Assessment and Management Planning subscale was 0.70 (0.54, 0.81), Core Recommended Treatments subscale was 0.84 (0.75, 0.90), Adjunctive Treatments subscale was 0.70 (0.39, 0.87) and for the total QUIPA score was 0.80 (0.69, 0.88). All predefined hypotheses regarding construct validity were confirmed. However, agreement between physiotherapists and participants for single items showed large measurement error (Cohen's Kappa estimates ranged from - 0.04-0.59) with the ICC (95% CI) for the total score being 0.11 (- 0.14, 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: The QUIPA tool showed acceptable test-retest reliability for subscales and total score but inadequate reliability for individual items. Construct validity was confirmed but criterion validity for individual items, subscales and the total score was inadequate. Further research is needed to refine the QUIPA tool to improve its clinimetric properties before implementation.