Search

Background Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are described as the gold standard of investigative clinical research. Evidence based practice is critical to the physiotherapy profession, and it is therefore important to explore the research underpinning practice by examining published RCTs. Objectives The main aims of this review were to profile the quantity and quality of RCTs published in the journal Physiotherapy over the past 50 years. Data sources Physiotherapy journal, hand searched (1967 to 1987) and electronically (1988 to 2017). Study selection or eligibility criteria Studies identified as RCTs. Study appraisal and synthesis methods Quality assessed via PEDRO criteria. Results 120 RCTs were identified from January 1967 to January 2017. The frequency of RCTs published has increased steadily and the UK was the most common source of RCTs, but the prevalence of non-UK based trials is increasing. The quality of RCTs improved steadily over the decades, with a mean PEDro score of 6.9 in the most recent decade (2017 to 2008), indicative of ‘high quality’. The mean number of trial participants was 60 and the most commonly evaluated area was musculoskeletal physiotherapy. Limitations RCTs were not evaluated against CONSORT criteria. Conclusion and implications of key findings Frequency of publication of RCTs in the journal Physiotherapy has increased over this time, mirroring trends in the wider medical literature. This highlights the predominance of some areas of research such as musculoskeletal and exercise-based research while other prominent areas such as neurology appear to be less researched.

Objective To provide a snapshot of current activities, barriers and perceived training needs for the assessment and management of behavioural risk factors in physiotherapy practice in primary care settings in the Republic of Ireland. Design Cross-sectional survey of primary care physiotherapists. Method Two hundred and twenty primary care physiotherapists were invited to participate. Each received a questionnaire, consisting of 23 questions, within five key sections. Its main focus was the risk factor management practices of physiotherapists. Descriptive statistics and frequencies were used to analyse the data. Results A response rate of 74% (163/220) was achieved. Level of physical activity was the most common risk factor assessed at initial and follow-up visits (78%, 127/163), followed by dietary status (55%, 90/163). Few respondents included smoking status and alcohol consumption in their assessment; however, the majority considered them as risk factors that should be addressed. The main reasons why smoking status and alcohol consumption were not assessed were lack of time, limited knowledge and expertise, not traditionally viewed as the physiotherapist's role, and patient's lack of interest in changing their unhealthy behaviour. Conclusion The findings highlight an untapped potential in relation to physiotherapists addressing lifestyle-related risk factors. A number of strategies are required to improve the systematic assessment and management of these risk factors.