| 1. |
- Dincer, Fitnat, et al.
(författare)
-
The approach of physiatrists to low back pain across Europe
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation. - : IOS PRESS. - 1053-8127 .- 1878-6324. ; 32:1, s. 131-139
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is the most common type of musculoskeletal pain, thus it is one of the most commonly encountered conditions in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine. The physicians who are primarily responsible for the nonsurgical management of LBP are physiatrists. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to investigate the approaches of physiatrists to low back pain across Europe. Preferences, tendencies, and priorities in the diagnosis, management, and treatment of LBP, as well as the epidemiological data pertaining to LBP in PRM practice were evaluated in this Europe-wide study. METHODS: The study was conducted under the control of the European Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ESPRM) Musculoskeletal Disorders Research Committee. A total of 576 physiatrists from most European countries participated in the survey. RESULTS: The results show that physiatrists frequently deal with patients with LBP in their daily practice. Most patients are not referred to other departments and are treated with various conservative methods. Less than one-fifth of patients are primarily referred for surgery. The physiatrists believe that a clear diagnosis to account for cases of low back pain is rarely established. The most common diagnosis is discopathy. History and physical examination remain the most valuable clinical evaluation tools for low back pain according to physiatrists. Less than half the patients require a magnetic resonance imaging. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are the most commonly prescribed drugs for low back pain. Exercise, back care information, and physical therapy are the preferred conservative treatments. More than half of the physiatrists offer interventional treatments to patients with low back pain. CONCLUSION: The present study is a preliminary report that presents the attitudes of European physiatrists in the management of low back pain. Further researches are warranted to standardize the conservative management of LBP.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Zampolini, Mauro, et al.
(författare)
-
Evidence-based position paper on Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) professional practice on telerehabilitation : the European PRM position (UEMS PRM Section)
- 2024
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine. - : Edizioni Minerva Medica. - 1973-9087 .- 1973-9095. ; 60:2, s. 165-181
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- INTRODUCTION: The evidence on the utility and effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions delivered via telerehabilitation is growing rapidly. Telerehabilitation is expected to have a key role in rehabilitation in the future.AIM: The aim of this evidence-based position paper (EBPP) is to improve PRM physicians' professional practice in telerehabilitation to be delivered to improve functioning and to reduce activity limitations and/or participation restrictions in individuals with a variety of disabling health conditions.METHODS: To produce recommendations for PRM physicians on telerehabilitation, a systematic review of the literature and a consensus procedure by means of a Delphi process have been performed involving the delegates of all European countries represented in the UEMS PRM Section. RESULTS: The systematic literature review is reported together with the 32 recommendations resulting from the Delphi procedure.CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended that PRM physicians deliver rehabilitation services remotely, via digital means or using communication technologies to eligible individuals, whenever required and feasible in a variety of health conditions in favor of the patient and his/her family, based on evidence of effectiveness and in compliance with relevant regulations. This EBPP represents the official position of the European Union through the UEMS PRM Section and designates the professional role of PRM physicians in telerehabilitation.
|
|
| 4. |
- Zampolini, Mauro, et al.
(författare)
-
The Individual Rehabilitation Project as the core of person-centred rehabilitation : the Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Section and Board of the European Union of Medical Specialists framework for rehabilitation in Europe
- 2022
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine. - : Edizioni Minerva Medica. - 1973-9087 .- 1973-9095. ; 58:4, s. 503-510
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To facilitate the interaction between the health professional and the patient, a framework to guide the rehabilitation process is needed. This framework would encompass three interwoven aspects: the rehabilitation management plan, Individual Rehabilitation Project (IRP), and rehabilitation cycle(s). All three framework aspects focus on the patient and on the aim of rehabilitation, i.e. to optimize a person's functioning across the continuum of care. An IRP is a multi-element, person-centred rehabilitation management scheme, in which rehabilitation is generally provided by a multi-professional team under the leadership of a physical and rehabilitation medicine (PRM) physician, working in an interdisciplinary manner and together with the patient (or proxy). A reference system for operationalizing functioning and standardizing the process is the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) - for assessing functioning needs, defining rehabilitation goals and outcomes. The objective of this paper is to present the IRP as a framework for rehabilitation in Europe (EUR-IRP). The specific aims are to 1) introduce the IRP and 2) describe the framework components, elements and variables of the IRP. Demonstration projects (case studies) using the EUR-IRP will be conducted. The present paper presents the efforts to date for developing the EUR-IRP, a key part of action plan of the PRM Section and Board of the European Union of Medical Specialists to implement the ICF systemwide across the care continuum. This paper serves as another step to bring together practice, science and governance in calling for contribution from rehabilitation clinicians and researchers and professional societies in PRM and beyond.
|
|
