| 1. |
- Agnew, Louise, et al.
(författare)
-
Factors associated with work ability in patients with chronic whiplash-associated disorder grade II-III : a cross-sectional analysis
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. - : FOUNDATION REHABILITATION INFORMATION. - 1650-1977 .- 1651-2081. ; 47:6, s. 546-551
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To investigate the factors related to self-perceived work ability in patients with chronic whiplash-associated disorder grades II-III.Design: Cross-sectional analysis.Patients: A total of 166 working age patients with chronic whiplash-associated disorder.Methods: A comprehensive survey collected data on work ability (using the Work Ability Index); demographic, psychosocial, personal, work- and condition-related factors. Forward, stepwise regression modelling was used to assess the factors related to work ability.Results: The proportion of patients in each work ability category were as follows: poor (12.7%); moderate (39.8%); good (38.5%); excellent (9%). Seven factors explained 65% (adjusted R-2 = 0.65, p < 0.01) of the variance in work ability. In descending order of strength of association, these factors are: greater neck disability due to pain; reduced self-rated health status and health-related quality of life; increased frequency of concentration problems; poor workplace satisfaction; lower self-efficacy for performing daily tasks; and greater work-related stress.Conclusion: Condition-specific and psychosocial factors are associated with self-perceived work ability of individuals with chronic whiplash-associated disorder.
|
|
| 2. |
- Elvén, Maria, 1973-, et al.
(författare)
-
Assessing clinical reasoning in physical therapy : discriminative validity of the Reasoning 4 Change instrument
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Physiotherapy. - : Elsevier BV. - 0031-9406 .- 1873-1465. ; 117, s. 8-15
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: To evaluate discriminative validity of the Reasoning 4 Change (R4C) instrument by investigating differences in clinical reasoning skills between first semester, final semester physical therapy students and physical therapy experts.Design:Cross-sectional designSetting: University and physical therapy practiceParticipantsStudents from the first (n = 87) and final semester (n = 47) of an entry-level physical therapy program and experts in physical therapy with a behavioral medicine approach (n = 14).Methods: The students and experts answered the web-based R4C instrument on one occasion. The R4C instrument includes four domains designed to assess physical therapists’ clinical reasoning skills with a focus on supporting clients’ behavior change and has demonstrated acceptable content validity, convergent validity and reliability. Data was analyzed with one-way analysis of variance and Games-Howell post hoc test.Results: Differences in all domains and subscale scores were found between the three groups. Pairwise comparisons demonstrated that experts scored higher (better clinical reasoning skills) than first semester students in all domains and subscales; and higher scores than final semester students, except for two subscales. Final semester students scored higher than first semester students, except for one subscale.Conclusions: The findings highlight differences in clinical reasoning skills focusing on clients’ behavior change among physical therapy students with different degrees of training and education in clinical reasoning and physical therapists with extensive experience and expertise. The results provide evidence for the discriminative validity of the R4C instrument which support the use of the R4C instrument in education, research and clinical practice.
|
|
| 3. |
- Fritz, Johanna, et al.
(författare)
-
Do Physical Therapists Practice a Behavioral Medicine Approach? : A Comparison of Perceived and Observed Practice Behaviors
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Physical Therapy. - : NLM (Medline). - 0031-9023 .- 1538-6724. ; 103:5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: A behavioral medicine approach, incorporating a biopsychosocial view and behavior change techniques, is recommended in physical therapy for the management of musculoskeletal pain. However, little is known about physical therapists' actual practice behavior regarding the behavioral medicine approach. The aim of this study was to examine how physical therapists in primary health care judge their own practice behavior of a behavioral medicine approach in the assessment and treatment of patients with persistent musculoskeletal pain versus how they practice a behavioral medicine approach as observed by independent experts in video recordings of patient consultations. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted. Video recordings of 23 physical therapists' clinical behavior in 139 patient consultations were observed by independent experts and compared with the physical therapists' self-reported practice behavior, using a protocol including 24 clinical behaviors. The difference between observed and self-reported clinical behaviors was analyzed with a Chi-square test and a Fisher exact test. RESULTS: The behavioral medicine approach was, in general, practiced to a small extent and half of the self-reported clinical behaviors were overestimated when compared with the observed behaviors. According to the observations, the physical perspective dominated in assessment and treatment, the functional behavioral analysis was never performed, and the mean number of behavior change techniques used was 0.7. CONCLUSION: There was a discrepancy between how physical therapists perceived the extent to which they practiced a behavioral medicine approach in their clinical behavior compared with what the independent researchers observed in the video recordings. IMPACT: This study demonstrates the importance of using observations instead of using self-reports when evaluating professionals' clinical behavior. The results also suggest that-to ensure that physical therapy integrates the biopsychosocial model of health-physical therapists need to increase their focus on psychosocial factors in clinical practice.
|
|
| 4. |
- Linton, Steven J., et al.
(författare)
-
A randomized controlled trial of exposure in vivo for patients with spinal pain reporting fear of work-related activities
- 2008
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Pain. - : Elsevier. - 1090-3801 .- 1532-2149. ; 12:6, s. 722-730
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Pain-related fear is related to disability in persistent pain conditions. Exposure treatment has been reported to be of great benefit in replicated single case experiments.AIM: To evaluate the effects of exposure in vivo on fear and function in patients with persistent pain and work disability.METHOD: We recruited 46 patients suffering from long-term back pain and reduced function, who also were deemed fearful according to standardized measures. Participants were randomized into either an exposure plus usual treatment or waiting list control plus usual treatment group. After the waiting period the control group crossed over and received the exposure treatment.RESULTS: Between group comparisons showed a significantly better result for the exposure group on function, but not for fear or pain and effect sizes were modest (function=.6; fear=.4; pain=.1). When the control group crossed over to treatment significant treatment effects were noted for fear and function. For all patients treated, the pre to post-treatment effect sizes were large (function=.7; fear=1.1; pain=.9). There were 12 dropouts (8 in exposure and 4 in the control) during the first treatment phase and an additional 4 when the control group crossed over to exposure.CONCLUSIONS: Compared to a group receiving usual treatment and waiting for exposure, the exposure in vivo group demonstrated a significantly larger improvement on function. Overall exposure had moderate effects on function, fear and pain intensity. We conclude that exposure may be important in treatment, but is not recommended as a "stand alone" adjunct to usual treatment.
|
|
| 5. |
- Lo, Hiu Kwan, et al.
(författare)
-
Factors associated with work ability following exercise interventions for people with chronic whiplash-associated disorders : Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. - : Medical Journals Sweden AB. - 1650-1977 .- 1651-2081. ; 50:9, s. 828-836
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To investigate the efficacy of exercise interventions and factors associated with changes in work ability for people with chronic whiplash-associated disorders. Design: Secondary analysis of a single-blind, randomized multi-centre controlled trial. Setting: Interventions were conducted in Swedish primary care settings. Patients: A total of 165 individuals with chronic whiplash-associated disorders grade II-III. Methods: Participants were randomly allocated to neck-specific exercise, neck-specific exercise with a behavioural approach, or prescribed physical activity interventions. Work ability was evaluated with the Work Ability Index at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months. Results: The neck-specific exercise with a behavioural approach intervention significantly improved work ability compared with the prescribed physical activity intervention (3 months, p = 0.03; 6 months, p = 0.01; 12 months, p = 0.01), and neck-specific exercise at 12 months (p = 0.01). Neck-specific exercise was better than the prescribed physical activity intervention at 6 months (p = 0.05). An increase in work ability from baseline to one year for the neck-specific exercise with a behavioural approach group (p < 0.01) was the only significant within-group difference. Higher self-rated physical demands at work, greater disability, greater depression and poorer financial situation were associated with poorer work ability (p < 0.01). Conclusion: This study found that neck-specific exercise with a behavioural approach intervention was better at improving self-reported work ability than neck-specific exercise or prescribed physical activity. Improvement in work ability is associated with a variety of factors.
|
|
| 6. |
- Overmeer, Thomas, 1960-, et al.
(författare)
-
Do evidence-based guidelines have an impact in primary care? : A cross-sectional study of Swedish physicians and physiotherapists
- 2005
-
Ingår i: Spine. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0362-2436 .- 1528-1159. ; 30:1, s. 146-151
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Study Design. A cross-sectional study of physicians and physiotherapists in primary care. Objectives. To survey how familiar clinicians were with evidence-based guidelines for back pain and their opinion about their clinical usefulness and to compare self-reported practice behavior with the guidelines. Summary of Background Data. Guidelines, based on empirical evidence, are meant to ensure that patients get the most effective treatment. These evidence-based guidelines should steer clinical praxis, but clinicians may not read, let alone heed, them. Methods. Using a questionnaire, the authors surveyed all physicians and physiotherapists in primary health care in Örebro County, Sweden (N = 235). Results. Forty-two percent of the physicians and 37% of the physiotherapists were unfamiliar with the content of the guidelines, and 40% of the physicians and 25% of the physiotherapists were unfamiliar with the concept of 'red flags.' Less than half of the clinicians, 47%, were familiar both with the content of the guidelines and the concept of red flags. Their opinion about the guidelines showed that 54% of the physicians and 56% of the physiotherapists agreed that the guidelines were useful in clinical praxis. Concerning the self-reported practice behavior, the majority indicated that they followed the key points in the guidelines. Conclusions. A relatively large proportion of clinicians were unfamiliar with the content of evidence-based guidelines and/or with the concept of red flags. The process of implementing research into clinical practice is in need of an overhaul, and the impact of guidelines on clinical practice may be questioned.
|
|
| 7. |
- Overmeer, Thomas, 1960-, et al.
(författare)
-
Do physical therapists recognise established risk factors? : Swedish physical therapists' evaluation in comparison to guidelines
- 2004
-
Ingår i: Physiotherapy. - Amsterdam : Elsevier. - 0031-9406 .- 1873-1465. ; 90:1, s. 35-41
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and purpose The Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care has widely distributed the most recent Swedish evidence-based review on neck and back pain. In this review psychosocial factors were acknowledged as important risk factors for developing chronic pain. We surveyed physical therapists’ evaluation of risk factors for the development of chronic pain. The results were compared to the review of the Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care.Methods A postal questionnaire was sent to all 117 physical therapists working in primary care in Örebro County, Sweden.Results The survey was responded to by 102 physical therapists (87%). Over 50% of them indicated as important more than twice as many risk factors than are supported by the evidence-based review.More than 50% of the physical therapists pointed out all eight evidence-based factors described in the evidence-based review but they also indicated a median of 10 additional factors with little or no support in the literature. More than 80% of the physical therapists responded according to the recommendations of the evidence-based review concerning sick leave and instructions to patients regarding activities and pain relief. Forty-four physical therapists (43%) indicated that they could predict which patients would develop chronic pain in the future.Conclusions Physical therapists represented by this sample were well aware of the importance of psychosocial risk factors, but because of the large number of additional factors indicated it seems physical therapists lack specificity about which factors are important.
|
|
| 8. |
- Overmeer, Thomas, 1960-, et al.
(författare)
-
Does teaching physical therapists to deliver a biopsychosocial treatment program result in better patient outcomes? : A randomized controlled trial
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Physical Therapy. - 0031-9023 .- 1538-6724. ; 91:5, s. 804-819
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background. Psychosocial prognostic factors are important in the development of chronic pain, but treatment providers often lack knowledge and skills to assess and address these risk factors. Objective. The aim of this study was to examine the effects on outcomes (pain and disability) in patients of a course about psychosocial prognostic factors for physical therapists. Design. This study was a randomized, controlled trial. Setting. The setting was primary care practice. Participants. Forty-two primary care physical therapists attended an 8-day university course (over 8 weeks) aimed at identifying and addressing psychosocial risk factors. Intervention. The physical therapists were randomly assigned to either the course or a waiting list. They treated consecutive patients with acute and subacute musculoskeletal pain both before and after the course. Measurements. We measured physical therapists' attitudes and beliefs about psychosocial factors, knowledge, and skills before and after the course. We measured patients' pain, disability, catastrophizing, and mood at the start of treatment and at a 6-month follow-up. Methods. The physical therapists were randomly assigned to either the course or a waiting list. They treated consecutive patients with acute and subacute musculoskeletal pain both before and after the course. Results. Pain and disability outcomes in all patients of physical therapists who had participated in the course or in patients at risk of developing long-term disability who had higher levels of catastrophizing or depression were not significantly different from those outcomes in patients of physical therapists who had not participated in the course. Pain and disability outcomes in patients with a low risk of developing long-term disability-and pain outcomes in patients with a high risk of developing long-term disability-were not dependent upon whether the attitudes and beliefs of their physical therapists changed during the course. However, disability outcomes in patients with a high risk of developing long-term disability may have been influenced by whether the attitudes and beliefs of their physical therapists changed. Limitations. A limitation of this study was that actual practice behavior was not measured. Conclusions. An 8-day university course for physical therapists did not improve outcomes in a group of patients as a whole or in patients with a risk of developing long-term disability. However, patients who had a risk of developing long-term disability and had higher levels of catastrophizing or depression may have shown greater reductions in disability if the attitudes and beliefs of their physical therapists changed during the course.
|
|
| 9. |
- Overmeer, Thomas, 1960-, et al.
(författare)
-
Does teaching physical therapists to deliver a biopsychosocial treatment program result in better patient outcomes? : A randomized controlled trial
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Physical Therapy. - : Oxford University Press. - 0031-9023 .- 1538-6724. ; 91:5, s. 804-819
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Psychosocial risk factors are important in the development of chronic pain but treatment providers often lack knowledge and skills to assess and address these risk factors.Objectives: We examined the effects of a course on psychosocial factors for physical therapists on patient outcome in terms of pain and disability. Design: A randomised controlled trail.Participants: Forty-two primary care physical therapists attended an eight-day university course over eight weeks aimed at identifying and addressing psychosocial risk factors.Methods: They were randomised to either the course or a waiting list. The physical therapists collected consecutive acute and sub-acute patients with musculoskeletal pain both before and after the course.Results: There were no significant differences in outcome for pain or disability for allpatients of physical therapists who had participated in the course or for risk patients with higher levels of catastrophizing or depression compared to patients of physical therapists who had not participated in the course. Outcome for low risk patients on pain and disability and for high risk patients on pain was not dependent on if their physical therapists changed their attitudes and beliefs during the course. Yet, outcome on disability for high risk patients may have been influenced if their physical therapists change their attitudes and beliefs.Limitations: no measure of actual practice behaviour.Conclusions: An eight-day university course for physiotherapists did not improve outcome for the group of patients as a whole or patients at risk of developing long term disability. Yet, risk patients with higher levels of catastrophizing or depression may have had a greater improvement in disability if their physical therapist changed attitudes and beliefs during the course.
|
|
| 10. |
- Overmeer, Thomas, 1960-
(författare)
-
Implementing psychosocial factors in physical therapy treatment for patients with musculoskeletal pain in primary care
- 2010
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This dissertation focuses on 2 parts: 1) Whether evidence-based guidelines are recognized and integrated into clinical practice in primary care and 2) Whether a university course aimed at teaching physical therapists to identify and address evidence-based psychosocial factors in primary care might change practice behaviour and patient outcome. To this end practising clinicians were surveyed and a course for physical therapists was developed.Concerning the first part, we showed that a relatively large proportion of clinicians in primary care were unfamiliar with the content of evidence-based guidelines and/or with the concept of “Red flags”. Yet, concerning the self-reported practice behaviour, the majority indicated they followed the key points in the guidelines. To enhance the impact of guidelines, interventions or tactics for teaching and implementing guidelines should include interactive education,discussion, feedback, and reminders which in research have shown to enhance knowledge,skills and change behaviour. Furthermore, the clinical applicability of the guidelines needs to be further developed. We could also show that psychosocial factors were integrated up to a certain point and that physical therapists in primary care were well aware of the importance of psychosocial risk factors, but it seemed physical therapists lack specificity about which factors are important. Physical therapists may have heard about risk factors but probably did not have a clear model or structure about how these factors work.Concerning the second part, the results showed that we, by means of a university course, managed to change attitudes and beliefs, increase knowledge, skills and competencies towards a more biopsychosocial standpoint. But despite these changes, the results did not show a behavioural change on behalf of the physical therapists or a better outcome for patients at risk of longterm pain and disability. Several possible explanations for this are discussed. First, the content of the course should be changed so it focuses more on behavioural change on behalf of the physical therapists. This would facilitate implementation of new behaviour in clinical practice and increase the likelihood that the new behaviour is maintained and thereby the possibility of improved patient outcome. Second, treating patients at risk for long-term pain and disability may also be too difficult for a single physical therapist in a clinical setting. This would imply large changes in the way patients are directed through the health care system compared to now. The main tasks of the physical therapists in primary care would then be to select patients at risk for long-term pain and disability. They would then treat the patients not at risk and refer the patients at risk for long-term pain and disability to more suitable treatment, for example CBT treatment delivered by a psychologist or multimodal treatment delivered by a team of experts.Since risk patients experience most suffering and are the most costly for the health care system, it is important they get the appropriate treatment at the earliest possible opportunity.In summary, this dissertation shows that integrating psychosocial factors in physical therapy is not an easy task.
|
|
