Dataset Information

Current use of measurement instruments by physiotherapists working in Germany: a cross-sectional online survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The use of measurement instruments in physiotherapy has been recommended in clinical practice guidelines to improve evidence-based practice. The aims of the study were (a) to describe the current use of measurement instruments by physiotherapists working in Germany and (b) to investigate the facilitators and barriers to use measurement instruments.

Methods

This cross-sectional study used a nationwide online survey, which was accessible to all physiotherapists working in Germany.

Results

In total, 522 adult physiotherapists working in Germany completed the questionnaire. The mean age of the respondents was 38 years, 63% were female, and 53% had >10 years of work experience. Thirty-one percent of the respondents used measurement instruments in ?80% of their patients, and 26% used measurement instruments in ?20%. Measurement instruments were used for diagnostic and prognostic purposes by 69% and 22% of respondents, respectively. The three most frequently reported measurement instruments were "goniometer" (n?=?254), some kind of a "visual/numeric analogue scale" (n?=?139), and the "manual examination of muscle-strength" (n?=?54). Seven of the 13 most stated measurement instruments measure activities or participation. The most important facilitator was physiotherapists' positive attitudes towards measurement instruments. Two out of three respondents reported having sufficient knowledge and skills to apply measurement instruments in clinical practice. The most pronounced barriers were insufficient additional financial compensations and requiring extra time to document test scores. Seventy-eight percent of the respondents could imagine using an electronic device for a user-friendly patient health record system in clinical practice.

Conclusions

The limited use of measurement instruments reported by physiotherapists working in Germany appears to be due to organisational issues, in combination with a lack of knowledge and skills needed to apply the measurement instruments, rather than due to individual or managerial reasons. To support the use of measurement instruments, sufficient time resources and adequate financial compensation are required. Educational approaches should focus on imparting patient-centred and patient-reported outcomes to quantify activities and participation. Electronic patient health record systems have potential to facilitate the application of standardised measurement instruments if the barriers identified in this survey are addressed properly.

SUBMITTER: Braun T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6199696 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Current use of measurement instruments by physiotherapists working in Germany: a cross-sectional online survey.

Braun Tobias T Rieckmann Alina A Weber Franziska F Grüneberg Christian C

BMC health services research 20181023 1

<h4>Background</h4>The use of measurement instruments in physiotherapy has been recommended in clinical practice guidelines to improve evidence-based practice. The aims of the study were (a) to describe the current use of measurement instruments by physiotherapists working in Germany and (b) to investigate the facilitators and barriers to use measurement instruments.<h4>Methods</h4>This cross-sectional study used a nationwide online survey, which was accessible to all physiotherapists working in ...[more]

PMID: 30352584

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Swiss containment strategy for the COVID-19 pandemic during the first wave in spring 2020 resulted in a moratorium on non-urgent physiotherapy via regular direct patient contact. Consequently, such physiotherapy sessions declined by 84%. This study investigates the impact of this moratorium on the use of digital remote physiotherapy in Switzerland during this period and the perceptions of its use by Swiss physiotherapists (PTs).MethodsA cross-sectional online questionnaire was distributed between June and August of 2020 via the Swiss Physiotherapy Association (physioswiss) and various associations of physiotherapy specialists (e.g., sport, pediatric) working in both inpatient and outpatient settings. The questionnaire was designed to capture the demographics of participants and the perceptions of PTs using 33 questions in the following domains: Demography; Attitudes towards digital technology; Private and professional use of digital technology; Use of digital technology during therapy; and, Support requirements. Closed and open-ended questions were included and the frequency of answers was analyzed. Non-parametric inferential statistics were used to identify differences, where appropriate. The Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) was adopted.ResultsParticipants in the survey were 742 PTs (23.5% male, mean age of 43 years, mean working experience of 18 years) from the German-speaking (75.5%), French-speaking (15.1%), and Italian-speaking (9.4%) regions of Switzerland. The percentage of PTs using digital remote therapy increased from 4.9% prior to the lockdown to 44.6% during the lockdown period. The majority of PTs did not consider that digital remote therapy could complement usual physiotherapy practice and did not plan to continue with digital remote therapy after the pandemic.ConclusionsDuring the lockdown, Swiss PTs adopted various low-cost and easily accessible digital technologies. However, several barriers hampered further implementation of this modality. Specific education and training programs need to be provided among PTs, appropriate digital technologies should be introduced, and a correct reimbursement scheme should be developed.Trial registrationCOVIDPhysio Registry of World Physiotherapy, registered 15th June 2020 ( https://world.physio/covid-19-information-hub/covid-19-covidphysio-registry ).

Project description:BackgroundOccupational stress is considered an ongoing epidemic. An inadequate response to a stressful situation can trigger burnout syndrome. In this way, the assistant services (health and teaching) often reach higher levels of burnout. The present study aimed to measure the level of occupational stress and burnout in physiotherapists in the province of Cadiz (Spain), working in the public and/or private sector.MethodsThis was an observational, descriptive and cross-sectional study. A sample of 272 physiotherapists took part in the study. The variables measured were sociodemographic variables, working conditions, level of occupational stress and burnout. Burnout includes three characteristics or dimensions: emotional exhaustion (EE), depersonalization (DP) and personal accomplishment (PA). Correspondence analysis of the sociodemographic, organizational and psychological variables were analyzed using Chi-squared significance tests. Spearman correlations and a linear regression analysis were also carried out to determine the dependence between occupational stress and burnout.ResultsThe results showed that 30.51% of physiotherapists suffered from a high level of occupational stress, while 34.56% suffered from an average level. There was a clear dependence between a high level of stress and professionals who felt stressed during their academic training period (p?=?0.02), those who were in temporary work (p?=?0.03) and those with over 10 years of professional experience (p?=?0.05). The overall level of burnout was low, since only the EE dimension had a high value; the average was 21.64?±?10.57. The DP (6.57?±?4.65) and PA (39.52?±?5.97) levels were low. There was a significant dependence (p?<?0.05) between EE and the following sociodemographic variables: work shift, willingness to study the same degree, stress and inadequate academic training, and a stressful job. In addition, a significant correlation was found between occupational stress and the EE and DP dimensions of burnout.ConclusionsA high prevalence of occupational stress was detected among physiotherapists in Cadiz (Spain). The levels of occupational stress and its correlation with burnout show that the cumulative effect of stress could lead to burnout. Furthermore, these results regarding occupational stress show the necessity of developing coping strategies for physiotherapists and healthcare staff.

Project description:BackgroundDigital technologies are shaping medicine and public health.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate the attitudes toward and the use of digital technologies for health-related purposes using a nationwide survey.MethodsWe performed a cross-sectional study using a panel sample of internet users selected from the general population living in Germany. Responses to a survey with 28 items were collected using computer-assisted telephone interviews conducted in October 2020. The items were divided into four topics: (1) general attitudes toward digitization, (2) COVID-19 pandemic, (3) physical activity, and (4) perceived digital health (eHealth) literacy measured with the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS; sum score of 8=lowest to 40=highest perceived eHealth literacy). The data were analyzed in IBM-SPSS24 using relative frequencies. Three univariate multiple regression analyses (linear or binary logistic) were performed to investigate the associations among the sociodemographic factors (age, gender, education, and household income) and digital technology use.ResultsThe participants included 1014 internet users (n=528, 52.07% women) aged 14 to 93 years (mean 54, SD 17). Among all participants, 66.47% (674/1014) completed up to tertiary (primary and secondary) education and 45.07% (457/1017) reported a household income of up to 3500 Euro/month (1 Euro=US $1.18). Over half (579/1014, 57.10%) reported having used digital technologies for health-related purposes. The majority (898/1014, 88.56%) noted that digitization will be important for therapy and health care, in the future. Only 25.64% (260/1014) reported interest in smartphone apps for health promotion/prevention and 42.70% (433/1014) downloaded the COVID-19 contact-tracing app. Although 52.47% (532/1014) reported that they come across inaccurate digital information on the COVID-19 pandemic, 78.01% (791/1014) were confident in their ability to recognize such inaccurate information. Among those who use digital technologies for moderate physical activity (n=220), 187 (85.0%) found such technologies easy to use and 140 (63.6%) reported using them regularly (at least once a week). Although the perceived eHealth literacy was high (eHEALS mean score 31 points, SD 6), less than half (43.10%, 400/928) were confident in using digital information for health decisions. The use of digital technologies for health was associated with higher household income (odds ratio [OR] 1.28, 95% CI 1.11-1.47). The use of digital technologies for physical activity was associated with younger age (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.94-0.96) and more education (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.46). A higher perceived eHealth literacy score was associated with younger age (β=-.22, P<.001), higher household income (β=.21, P<.001), and more education (β=.14, P<.001).ConclusionsInternet users in Germany expect that digitization will affect preventive and therapeutic health care in the future. The facilitators and barriers associated with the use of digital technologies for health warrant further research. A gap exists between high confidence in the perceived ability to evaluate digital information and low trust in internet-based information on the COVID-19 pandemic and health decisions.

Project description:BackgroundEligibility criteria are a fundamental element of clinical trial design, defining who can and who should not participate in a trial. Problems with the design or application of criteria are known to occur and pose risks to participants' safety and trial integrity, sometimes also negatively impacting on trial recruitment and generalisability. We conducted a short, exploratory survey to gather evidence on UK recruiters' experiences interpreting and applying eligibility criteria and their views on how criteria are communicated and developed.MethodsOur survey included topics informed by a wider programme of work at the Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, on assuring eligibility criteria quality. Respondents were asked to answer based on all their trial experience, not only on experiences with our trials. The survey was disseminated to recruiters collaborating on trials run at our trials unit, and via other mailing lists and social media. The quantitative responses were descriptively analysed, with inductive analysis of free-text responses to identify themes.ResultsA total of 823 eligible respondents participated. In total, 79% of respondents reported finding problems with eligibility criteria in some trials, and 9% in most trials. The main themes in the types of problems experienced were criteria clarity (67% of comments), feasibility (34%), and suitability (14%). In total, 27% of those reporting some level of problem said these problems had led to patients being incorrectly included in trials; 40% said they had led to incorrect exclusions. Most respondents (56%) reported accessing eligibility criteria mainly in the trial protocol. Most respondents (74%) supported the idea of recruiter review of eligibility criteria earlier in the protocol development process.ConclusionsOur survey corroborates other evidence about the existence of suboptimal trial eligibility criteria. Problems with clarity were the most often reported, but the number of comments on feasibility and suitability suggest some recruiters feel eligibility criteria and associated assessments can hinder recruitment to trials. Our proposal for more recruiter involvement in protocol development has strong support and some potential benefits, but questions remain about how best to implement this. We invite other trialists to consider our other suggestions for how to assure quality in trial eligibility criteria.

Project description:Backround: In February 2021, the first formal evidence and consensus-based (S3) guidelines for the inpatient treatment of patients with COVID-19 were published in Germany and have been updated twice during 2021. The aim of the present study is to re-evaluate the dissemination pathways and strategies for ICU staff (first evaluation in December 2020 when previous versions of consensus-based guidelines (S2k) were published) and question selected aspects of guideline adherence of standard care for patients with COVID-19 in the ICU. Methods: We conducted an anonymous online survey among German intensive care staff from 11 October 2021 to 11 November 2021. We distributed the survey via e-mail in intensive care facilities and requested redirection to additional intensive care staff (snowball sampling). Results: There was a difference between the professional groups in the number, selection and qualitative assessment of information sources about COVID-19. Standard operating procedures were most frequently used by all occupational groups and received a high quality rating. Physicians preferred sources for active information search (e.g., medical journals), while nurses predominantly used passive consumable sources (e.g., every-day media). Despite differences in usage behaviour, the sources were rated similarly in terms of the quality of the information on COVID-19. The trusted organizations have not changed over time. The use of guidelines was frequently stated and highly recommended. The majority of the participants reported guideline-compliant treatment. Nevertheless, there were certain variations in the use of medication as well as the criteria chosen for discontinuing non-invasive ventilation (NIV) compared to guideline recommendations. Conclusions: An adequate external source of information for nursing staff is lacking, the usual sources of physicians are only appropriate for the minority of nursing staff. The self-reported use of guidelines is high.

Dataset Information

Current use of measurement instruments by physiotherapists working in Germany: a cross-sectional online survey.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Current use of measurement instruments by physiotherapists working in Germany: a cross-sectional online survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets