Dataset Information

The type and scope of physiotherapy is under-utilised in Australian residential aged care facilities: a national, cross-sectional survey of physiotherapists

ABSTRACT:

Background

With an increasingly ageing population in Australia, more older adults who are frail are living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). The aim of this study was to detail the type, scope, and funding of physiotherapy utilised in Australian RACFs.

Methods

Registered physiotherapists (n = 219, 72% female, mean age (SD) = 38.6 (12.9) years) working in Australian RACFs participated in a nationwide, cross-sectional online survey. The survey was developed iteratively through a review of the literature and clinical guidelines, consensus of final survey items by an expert panel of five senior physiotherapists and aged care managers. Survey questions related to the characteristics of the physiotherapists (e.g., age, gender, employment status), characteristics of the RACFs (e.g., state, remoteness, sector), the type and scope of physiotherapy provided by respondents, and the availability of equipment and certain spaces (e.g., gyms) in the RACFs that respondents worked in. Survey responses were analysed and presented descriptively. Correlation using Spearman’s rho (ρ) and the associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to determine whether the availability of equipment or space at the RACF was associated with the time dedicated to performing non-Aged Care Funding Instrument (ACFI) tasks.

Results

Common reasons for physiotherapy referral were chronic pain management as per the ACFI framework (89.7%), falls (69.2%), and reduced mobility (35.9%). Rehabilitation or short-term restorative care was provided in only 22.2% of the facilities. The ACFI funded 91.4% of all participants, which limited physiotherapists to low-value chronic pain management including massage and electrical stimulation. Respondents spent 64.5% of their time on ACFI tasks, which equated to 19 h per week. More time was spent on non-ACFI tasks particularly when resistance bands (ρ = 0.28, 95%CI 0.14–0.41) and a dedicated therapy space or gym (ρ = 0.19, 95%CI 0.04–0.33) were available.

Conclusions

The expertise of physiotherapists is currently being under-utilised in Australian RACFs, which may be related to the availability of public funding, equipment, and space for therapy. Therefore, public health policy should address the urgent need for high-value, evidence-based physiotherapy that supports the reablement and independence of older adults living in RACFs.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-022-03248-4.

SUBMITTER: Brett L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9331124 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe aged care system in Australia is under pressure. Residential aged care facilities (RACFs) and general practitioners (GPs) have difficulty providing the care needed by their residents, particularly after hours. Many residents are given ambulance support and transferred to hospital emergency departments (EDs) for care that could be provided at RACFs. The MyEmergencyDoctor (MED) service was commissioned in a 12-month program (February 2020-February 2021) using ED physicians to provide afterhours telehealth care in six RACFs.MethodsUsing the NASSS framework, we synthesised descriptive analyses of statistical data from the MED service, RACFs and the ambulance service and a thematic analysis of interview data collected from GPs, RACF and MED service staff, and family members of residents.ResultsMost calls to MED (179/209) were resolved with in-house treatment thereby reducing ambulance usage and hospital admissions. Interviews further revealed that MED enabled timely care for residents who were unwell but did not need hospital transfer. Technology, training, and rapid access to MED assisted RACF staff and complemented usual GP care. MED potentially reduced GP burnout. Refresher training was considered important especially in RACFs with high staff turnover, as was greater afterhours access to medications.ConclusionsThe afterhours telehealth model provided in-house care and reduced ambulance transfers, and GPs and RACF staff generally felt supported. The service was easy to use and fostered good communications with GPs and RACF staff. Some GPs preferred to provide their own care, commenting on the need for a good understanding of patient and family needs and of the local context. Other stakeholders suggested this model could be extended to palliative care settings and to normal business hours when GPs were unavailable. The reduced ambulance and hospital use suggested benefits to wider health systems, however policies and funding that remunerate GPs, support community-based care and provide additional staffing in RACFs are needed to sustain afterhours telehealth in RACFs. Use of the NASSS (non-adoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability) Framework provided a valuable explanatory lens for our analyses.

Project description:BackgroundThe provision of residential aged care is underpinned by information, and is reliant upon systems that adequately capture and effectively utilise and communicate this information. The aim of this study was to explicate and quantify the volume and method by which information is collected, exchanged within facilities and with external providers, and retrieved from facility information systems and hospitals.MethodsA survey of staff (n = 119), including managers, health informatics officers (HIOs), quality improvement staff, registered nurses (RNs), enrolled nurses (ENs)/endorsed enrolled nurses (EENs) and assistants in nursing (AINs) was carried out in four residential aged care facilities in New South Wales and Victoria, Australia. Sites varied in size and displayed a range of information technology (IT) capabilities. The survey investigated how and by whom information is collected, retrieved and exchanged, and the frequency and amount of time devoted to these tasks. Descriptive analysis was performed using SPSS, and open responses to questions were coded into key themes.ResultsStaff completed a median of six forms each, taking a median of 30 min per shift. 68.8% of staff reported transferring information from paper to a computer system, which took a median of 30 min per shift. Handover and face-to-face communication was the most frequently used form of information exchange within facilities. There was a large amount of faxing and telephone communication between facility staff and General Practitioners and community pharmacists, with staff reporting sending a median of 2 faxes to pharmacy and 1.5 faxes to General Practitioners, and initiating 2 telephone calls to pharmacies and 1.5 calls to General Practitioners per shift. Only 38.5% of respondents reported that they always had information available at the point-of-care and only 35.4% of respondents reported that they always had access to hospital stay information of residents after hospital discharge.ConclusionsThis survey identified a high volume of information exchange activities, as well as inefficient procedures, such as the transfer of information from paper to computer systems and the reliance upon faxes for communication with external providers. These findings contribute to evidence for the need for interoperable IT systems to allow more efficient and reliable information exchange between facilities and external providers.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Choosing Wisely holds promise for increasing awareness of low-value care in physiotherapy. However, it is unclear how physiotherapists' view Choosing Wisely recommendations. The aim of this study was to evaluate physiotherapists' feedback on Choosing Wisely recommendations and investigate agreement with each recommendation. SETTING:The Australian Physiotherapy Association emailed a survey to all 20 029 physiotherapist members in 2015 seeking feedback on a list of Choosing Wisely recommendations. PARTICIPANTS:A total of 9764 physiotherapists opened the email invitation (49%) and 543 completed the survey (response rate 5.6%). Participants were asked about the acceptability of the wording of recommendations using a closed (Yes/No) and free-text response option (section 1). Then using a similar response format, participants were asked whether they agreed with each Choosing Wisely recommendation (sections 2-6). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES:We performed a content analysis of free-text responses (primary outcome) and used descriptive statistics to report agreement and disagreement with each recommendation (secondary outcome). RESULTS:There were 872 free-text responses across the six sections. A total of 347 physiotherapists (63.9%) agreed with the 'don't' style of wording. Agreement with recommendations ranged from 52.3% (electrotherapy for back pain) to 76.6% (validated decision rules for imaging). The content analysis revealed that physiotherapists felt that blanket rules were inappropriate (range across recommendations: 13.9%-30.1% of responses), clinical experience is more valuable than evidence (11.7%-28.3%) and recommendations would benefit from further refining or better defining key terms (7.3%-22.4%). CONCLUSIONS:Although most physiotherapists agreed with both the style of wording for Choosing Wisely recommendations and with the recommendations, their feedback highlighted a number of areas of disagreement and suggestions for improvement. These findings will support the development of future recommendations and are the first step towards increasing the impact Choosing Wisely has on physiotherapy practice.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To explore: (1) the views of Australian physiotherapists regarding potential implementation of non-medical prescribing in Australia, (2) how the geographical location and health sector in which a clinician works may influence their perceptions and (3) the perceptions of Australian physiotherapists about how physiotherapist prescribing might impact the care that the profession can provide. DESIGN:A cross-sectional descriptive survey using open and closed questions. SETTING:Participants completed an online questionnaire. PARTICIPANTS:883 Australian Health Professionals Registration Authority (AHPRA)-registered physiotherapists, working across all states and territories. OUTCOME MEASURES:An online questionnaire was developed by a panel of subject experts and pretested (n=10) for internal consistency. A hyperlink to the questionnaire was emailed to all members of the Australian Physiotherapy Association. A reminder email was sent 4 weeks later. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, with use of absolute risk reductions (ARRs) and 95% CIs to determine the likelihood that health sector or geographical location were associated with specific views. Thematic analysis enabled synthesis of the qualitative data. RESULTS:79.0% participants felt that physiotherapist prescribing should be introduced in Australia, with 71.2% wanting to train as prescribers. Clinical governance, risk management, regulation of clinicians and the development of an education framework were identified as priorities for implementation. Participants working in the private sector were significantly more likely to train as prescribers than those in the public sector (ARR 9.9%; 95% CI 3.5 to 16.4) or educational/research institutions (ARR 23.3%; 95% CI 12.8 to 33.8), with city dwellers significantly more likely to train compared with physiotherapists in remote regions (ARR 19.8%; 95% CI 0.8 to 39.2). Physiotherapist prescribing was predicted to improve efficiency of healthcare delivery, access to medicines and reductions in healthcare costs. CONCLUSIONS:AHPRA-registered physiotherapists perceive that the introduction of autonomous physiotherapist prescribing would be beneficial for the Australian population and should be introduced. Decision makers should consider the results of this survey in conjunction with cost-benefit and risk analysis when planning the introduction of physiotherapist prescribing.