Search

Person-centered care specifically focuses on the whole person and is an important component of contemporary care for people with musculoskeletal pain conditions. Evidence suggests however, that some clinicians experience difficulties with integrating person-centered care principles into their clinical practice. Therefore, the purpose of this masterclass is to provide a framework that enables clinicians to incorporate person-centered principles in their management of people with musculoskeletal pain conditions. To support clinicians in overcoming some of the reported obstacles, we provide practical recommendations aimed at putting principles of person-centered care into practice. The framework supporting clinicians' delivery of person-centered care in practice consists of three key-principles: A) a biopsychosocial understanding of the person's experience; B) person-focused communication; and C) supported self-management. The framework includes three phases: 1) identification and goal setting, 2) coaching to self-management, and 3) evaluation. Building a therapeutic relationship underpins these phases and is an overarching element that weaves through the key-principles and phases of the framework. We use a clinical case to illustrate the practical implementation of these recommendations., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Musculoskeletal rehabilitation, including physiotherapy, needs to move towards a broader biopsychosocial understanding of musculoskeletal conditions and the delivery of high-value care for people with persistent pain conditions, in which a patient-centered approach is a key feature. However, it has been reported that clinicians experience difficulties with integrating patient-centered care principles into their clinical practice. Based on a focused symposium about patient-centered care for patients with musculoskeletal conditions, held during the online 2021 World Physiotherapy Congress, the purpose of this article is to share key elements of the content of this symposium with a wider audience, aimed at enabling clinicians to enhance patient-centeredness in their current practice. These key elements include establishing meaningful connections, deciding together and self-management support. Moreover, challenges on patient-centered care in low/middle income countries will be discussed and recommendations to implement patient-centered care in clinical practice will be provided., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Telehealth services have helped enable continuity of care during the coronavirus pandemic. We aimed to investigate use and views towards telehealth among allied health clinicians treating people with musculoskeletal conditions during the pandemic., Methods: Cross-sectional international survey of allied health clinicians who used telehealth to manage musculoskeletal conditions during the coronavirus pandemic. Questions covered demographics, clinician-related factors (e.g. profession, clinical experience and setting), telehealth use (e.g. proportion of caseload, treatments used), attitudes towards telehealth (Likert scale), and perceived barriers and enablers (open questions). Data were presented descriptively, and an inductive thematic content analysis approach was used for qualitative data, based on the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation Behavioural Model., Results: 827 clinicians participated, mostly physiotherapists (82%) working in Australia (70%). Most (71%, 587/827) reported reduced revenue (mean (SD) 62% (24.7%)) since the pandemic commenced. Median proportion of people seen via telehealth increased from 0% pre (IQR 0 to 1) to 60% during the pandemic (IQR 10 to 100). Most clinicians reported managing common musculoskeletal conditions via telehealth. Less than half (42%) of clinicians surveyed believed telehealth was as effective as face-to-face care. A quarter or less believed patients value telehealth to the same extent (25%), or that they have sufficient telehealth training (21%). Lack of physical contact when working through telehealth was perceived to hamper accurate and effective diagnosis and management., Conclusion: Although telehealth was adopted by allied health clinicians during the coronavirus pandemic, we identified barriers that may limit continued telehealth use among allied health clinicians beyond the current pandemic., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Beliefs can be assessed using explicit measures (e.g. questionnaires) that rely on information of which the person is 'aware' and willing to disclose. Conversely, implicit measures evaluate beliefs using computer-based tasks that allow reduced time for introspection thus reflecting 'automatic' associations. Thus far, physiotherapists' beliefs about back posture and safety have not been evaluated with implicit measures., Objectives: (1) Evaluate implicit associations between bending lifting back posture (straight-back vs round-back) and safety (safe vs danger); (2) Explore correlations between implicit and explicit measures of beliefs towards vulnerability of the back., Design: Exploratory cross-sectional quantitative study., Methods: 47 musculoskeletal physiotherapists completed explicit measures of fear of movement (TSK-HC), back beliefs (BackPAQ Danger ) and beliefs related to bending and lifting back posture and safety (BSB). An Implicit Association Test (IAT) was used to assess implicit associations between (i) images of people bending/lifting with a 'round-back' or with a 'straight-back' posture, and (ii) words representing 'safety' and 'danger'. A one-sample t-test assessed the degree and direction of the sample's IAT score. Cohen's d provided an effect size of the estimated bias. Correlation between IAT and each explicit measure was assessed using Pearson's coefficient., Results: The sample displayed an implicit association between 'round-back' and 'danger' (μ = 0.213, 95% CI [0.075-0.350], p = .003), with an effect size magnitude of 0.45. There were fair to moderate correlations between IAT and BSB (r = 0.320, 95% CI [0.036-0.556], p = .029) and, IAT and BackPAQ Danger (r = 0.413, 95%CI [0.143-0.626], p = .004)., Conclusions: Physiotherapists displayed an implicit bias towards bending and lifting with a round-back as dangerous., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)