Search

Abstract Background Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are becoming essential parts of a learning health system, and using these measures is a promising approach for value-based healthcare. However, evidence regarding healthcare professional and patient organizations’ knowledge, use and perception of PROMs and PREMs is lacking. Objectives The objectives of the study were to: 1- Describe the current knowledge and use of PROMs and PREMs by healthcare professional and patient organizations, 2- Describe the determinants of PROMs and PREMs implementation according to healthcare professional and patient organizations. Methods We conducted an environmental scan using semi-structured interviews with representatives from healthcare professional and patient organizations. Interviews were recorded and live coded based on the Franklin framework. We used inductive and deductive thematic analysis to extract information about the main themes addressed during the interview (awareness of PROMs and PREMs, examples of implementation and use of PROMs and PREMs, tools used, vision for future implementation, barriers and facilitators to implementation and the best way to collect PROMs and PREMs data). Results 63% of healthcare professional organizations (n = 19) and 41% of patient organizations (n = 9) that were contacted agreed to have a representative interviewed. The representatives from both the healthcare professional and patient organizations acknowledged the importance of assessing patients’ experience and outcomes. However, they considered the implementation of PROMs and PREMs tools to be scarce within their organizations, in clinical practice and in the education system. Patient organizations were worried that overuse of PROMs and PREMs could lead to depersonalization of practice. Barriers to implementing PROMs and PREMs included lack of awareness of tools, resistance to change and lack of motivation to complete or explain the questionnaire. Barriers also included factors such as lack of financial, technological and human resources and issues with integration of data and inconsistency of digital platforms. Conclusions This environmental scan revealed a lack of awareness of tools by healthcare professional and patient organizations’ representatives and limited implementation. Adequate training, technological integration, and demonstration of PROMs and PREMs benefits to foster broader adoption in clinical and organizational settings is dearly needed. Addressing these challenges is essential for enhancing value-based care.

Abstract Background Physiotherapists working in collaboration with family physicians in French multidisciplinary primary healthcare clinics are now able to manage acute low back pain patients as first-contact practitioners in advanced practice roles. This includes medical act delegation such as making a medical diagnosis and prescribing medication. The aim of this study is to explore patients’ experience and perceptions when attending a first-contact physiotherapist (FCP) in an advanced practice collaborative primary care model for acute low back pain (LBP). Methods A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews was conducted. Patients that consulted a FCP for acute LBP care in new collaborative model were included. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and inductive thematic analysis was performed to generate themes related to patients’ experience and perceptions. Results Ten patients were interviewed (3 women, 7 men; mean age 36.5 ± 9.63 years). All LBP participants experienced important level of pain and disability. Four overarching themes related to patients’ experience with the new FCP model were formalized: 1) “Going to see a physiotherapist who specializes in painful movements, well that makes sense to me”, 2) “Physiotherapist offered to give me exercises to do at home to relieve the back pain”, 3) “I went there feeling confident”, 4) “The physiotherapist can do more than just send you to see more appropriate people”. Participants highlighted the need to receive timely and high-quality care and were receptive with being autonomously managed by a FCP. Overall, patients’ experiences with FCP model of care were positive. Participants were highly confident in the FCP’s ability to perform delegated medical tasks including making a medical diagnosis and prescribing oral medication such as analgesic drugs. Patients felt that a greater expansion of FCPs’ scope of practice was needed to improve the model. Conclusion Findings from this study can inform the implementation of FCP in countries where patients are not typically granted FCP by underlining that patients are favourable towards the advance practice model as such models support timely and high-quality care. Further research is needed to better determine the future advance practice physiotherapists’ scope of practice in French primary and secondary care settings.

Abstract Background The management of shoulder pain is challenging for primary care clinicians considering that 40% of affected individuals remain symptomatic one year after initial consultation. Developing tailored knowledge mobilization interventions founded on evidence-based recommendations while also considering patients’ expectations could improve primary care for shoulder pain. The aim of this qualitative study is to explore patients’ expectations and experiences of their primary care consultation for shoulder pain. Methods In this qualitative study, participants with shoulder pain and having consulted a primary care clinician in the past year were interviewed. All the semi-structured interviews were transcribed verbatim, and inductive thematic analysis was performed to identify themes related to the participants’ expectations and experiences of primary care consultations for shoulder pain. Results Thirteen participants with shoulder pain were interviewed (8 women, 5 men; mean age 50 ± 12 years). Eleven of them initially consulted a family physician or an emergency physician, and two participants initially consulted a physiotherapist. Four overarching themes related to patients’ expectations and experiences were identified from our thematic analysis: 1) I can’t sleep because of my shoulder; 2) I need to know what is happening with my shoulder; 3) But… we need to really see what is going on to help me!; and 4) Please take some time with me so I can understand what to do!. Several participants waited until they experienced a high level of shoulder pain before making an appointment since they were not confident about what their family physician could do to manage their condition. Although some participants felt that their physician took the time to listen to their concerns, many were dissatisfied with the limited assessment and education provided by the clinician. Conclusions Implementing evidence-based recommendations while considering patients’ expectations is important as it may improve patients’ satisfaction with healthcare. Several participants reported that their expectations were not met, especially when it came to the explanations provided. One unexpected finding that emerged from this study was the waiting period between the onset of shoulder pain and when patients decided to consult their primary care clinician.

Abstract Background Shoulder pain is difficult to diagnose and treat with half of those affected still symptomatic six months after initial consultation. This may be explained by primary care management not conforming to evidence-based practice. This survey evaluated physiotherapists (PTs) and family physicians' (FPs) knowledge and appropriateness of care in shoulder pain management. Methods A survey sent to PTs and FPs in the province of Quebec, Canada presented four clinical vignettes with cases of rotator cuff (RC) tendinopathy, acute full-thickness RC tear, adhesive capsulitis and traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability. Respondents indicated diagnosis, indications for imaging, specialists’ referrals, and choice of treatments. Answers were compared to recommendations from clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Participants’ responses were compared between types of providers with Fisher’s exact test. Results Respondents (PTs = 175, FPs = 76) were mostly women with less than ten years of experience. More than 80% of PTs and 84% of FPs correctly diagnosed cases presented. Despite this practice not being recommended, more FPs than PTs recommended an imaging test in the initial management of RC tendinopathy (30% compared to 13%, p = 0.001) and adhesive capsulitis (51% compared to 22%, p = 0.02). For full-thickness RC tear and shoulder instability, up to 72% of FPs and 67% of PTs did not refer to a specialist for a surgical opinion, although recommended by CPGs. For RC tendinopathy, 26% of FPs and 2% of PTs (p

Abstract Background Knee disorders are highly prevalent and may be a disabling condition. An accurate diagnosis is necessary to guide toward a rapid and efficient management of knee disorders. However, the ability to make a valid diagnosis is often complex for clinicians and evidence is mainly focused on clinician cognitive biases or errors produced during clinical reasoning. The aim of this secondary exploratory analysis is to identify patient-specific characteristics associated with diagnostic discordance between health care providers in making a diagnosis for a new knee disorder. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of a diagnostic study comparing the diagnostic ability of a physiotherapist to medical musculoskeletal specialists. Patients’ socio-demographic, psychosocial and clinical characteristics were compared between the concordant and discordant diagnostic groups. Psychosocial symptoms were evaluated using the validated Kessler 6 (K6) questionnaire. We performed multivariable logistic regressions using the Bayesian Information Criterion to identify the most probable model including patients’ characteristics associated with diagnostic discordance. Overall probability of identified variables to explain diagnostic discordance and associated odd ratios (OR) with 95% credibility intervals (95% CrI) were calculated. Results Overall, 279 participants were evaluated by a physiotherapist and medical musculoskeletal specialists. The mean age of the participants was 49.1 ± 15.8 years and 57.7% were female. The most common disorder was osteoarthritis (n = 117, 18.8% of cases were discordant). The most probable model explaining diagnostic discordance (11.13%) included having depressive symptoms, which was associated with an increased probability of diagnostic discordance (OR: 3.9; 95% CrI: 1.9 – 8.0) and having a higher number of comorbidities, which was associated with a decreased probability of diagnostic discordance (OR: 0.6; 95% CrI: 0.5 – 0.9). The depression item of the K6 questionnaire had a 99.4% chance to be included in a model explaining diagnostic discordance. Other variables taken separately had less than 50% chance to be included in a model explaining diagnostic discordance and cannot be considered significant. Conclusion Our results suggest that depressive symptoms may increase the risk of knee diagnostic discordance. Clinicians may be more likely to make diagnostic errors and should be more cautious when evaluating patients with knee disorders suffering from psychological distress.

Background: The accessibility for total joint arthroplasty often comes up against long wait lists, and may lead to deleterious effects for the awaiting patients. This pilot single blind randomized controlled trial aims to evaluate the impact of a telerehabilitation prehabilitation program before a hip or knee arthroplasty compared to in-person prehabilitation or to usual wait for surgery. Methods/design: Thirty-six patients on a wait list for a total hip or knee arthroplasty will be recruited and randomly assigned to one of three groups. The in-person prehabilitation group (n = 12) will receive a 12-week rehabilitation program (2 sessions/week) including education, exercises of the lower limb and cardiovascular training. Patients in the tele-prehabilitation group (n = 12) will receive the same intervention using a telecommunication software. The control group (n = 12) will be provided with the hospital's usual documentation before surgery. The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) will be the primary outcome measure taken at baseline and at 12 weeks. Secondary measures will include self-reported function and quality of life as well as performance tests. A mixed-model, 2-way repeated-measure ANOVA will be used to analyse the effects of the rehabilitation programs. Discussion: This pilot study is the first to evaluate the feasibility and the impact of a telerehabilitation prehabilitation program for patients awaiting a total joint arthroplasty. The results of this pilot-RCT will set the foundations for further research in the fields of rehabilitation and tele-medicine for patients suffering from lower limb osteoarthritis. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02636751.

Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of workplace-based interventions to prevent or treat shoulder pain. Data sources: A systematic review of 4 databases was performed up to January 2016. Study selection: Randomized controlled trials were included if the intervention under study was a workplace-based intervention performed to prevent or reduce shoulder pain and disability in workers. Data extraction: The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated and meta-analyses were conducted. Pooled mean differences and risk ratios were calculated. Data synthesis: Data from 4 studies on strengthening exercises performed in the workplace for workers with shoulder pain (n = 368) were pooled. A statistically significant reduction in pain intensity was observed compared with different control interventions (mean differences (scale out of 10) 1.31 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.86–1.76)). Pooled data from 5 studies on the efficacy of workstation modifications (n = 2,148) showed a statistically significant reduction in the prevalence of shoulder pain with a risk ratio of 1.88 (95% CI 1.20–2.96) compared with different control interventions. Conclusion: Low-grade evidence exists that a workplace exercise programme may reduce the intensity of shoulder pain, and that workstation modifications may reduce the prevalence of shoulder pain.