Development and Evaluation of an Implementation Strategy for Collecting Data in a National Registry and the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Physical Therapist Practices: Quality Improvement Study

Development of an implementation strategy for routine collection of generic patient reported outcome measures: a qualitative study in multidisciplinary community rehabilitation

PURPOSE

To explore staff perceptions of barriers and enablers towards implementing the EQ-5D-5L in community rehabilitation, and develop a theory-informed implementation approach for routine administration of generic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) using implementation science frameworks.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted at three sites. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation staff completed individual semi-structured interviews, which were transcribed and coded against the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). We identified and selected potentially effective behaviour change techniques using the Behavior Change Wheel. Hypothetical strategies were operationalised.

RESULTS

Twenty-one interviews were conducted, and four themes emerged: (1) The Impact of PROMs on patient centered-care; (2) Considerations for validity of PROMs; (3) Service-level impact of embedding PROMs; (4) Practical issues of embedding PROMs within the service. Barriers and enablers were mapped to seven of the TDF domains; relating most to clinicians' "belief about consequences", "reinforcement", and "environmental context and resources". Five hypothetical strategies were developed to overcome identified barriers and strengthen enablers. Key behaviour change techniques underpinning the strategies include: restructuring the physical environment, incentivisation, persuasion and education, enablement, and, social support.

CONCLUSIONS

Our implementation approach highlights the importance of automating processes, engaging site champions, routinely reporting, and using PROM data to inform service provision.

Using feedback on patient health outcomes to improve orthopaedic physical therapist practice: a quality improvement study

OBJECTIVE

Measuring health outcomes plays an important role in patient-centred healthcare. When aggregated across patients, outcomes can provide data for quality improvement (QI). However, most physical therapists are not familiar with QI methods based on patient outcomes. This mixed-methods study aimed to develop and evaluate a QI programme in outpatient physical therapy care based on routinely collected health outcomes of patients with low-back pain and neck pain.

METHODS

The QI programme was conducted by three teams of 5-6 physical therapists from outpatient settings. Plan-do-study-act cycles were used based on team-selected goals. Monthly feedback reports of process and outcomes of care, including pre-post treatment changes in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Neck Disability Index (NDI), guided the QI efforts. Primary outcomes were pre-QI and post-QI changes in knowledge and attitudes towards outcome measures through a survey, and administered and self-reported compliance with using the ODI and NDI. Semistructured interviews and a focus group were conducted to evaluate the perceived value of the programme.

RESULTS

Post-QI, the survey showed improvements in two items related to the role of patients and implementation of outcome measures. Registered pre-QI and post-QI completion rates were high at intake (ODI:91% pre, 88% post; NDI:75% pre, 84% post), while completion rates at discharge improved post-QI (ODI:14% pre, 66% post; NDI: 32% pre, 50% post). Perceived benefits of the QI programme included clinician and institutional accountability to processes and strategies aimed at continuous improvement in patient care. An important facilitator for programme participation was autonomy in project selection and development, while a main barrier was the time required to set up the QI project.

CONCLUSION

A QI programme based on the feedback of routinely collected health outcomes of patients with low back pain and neck pain was feasible and well accepted by three pilot teams of physical therapists.

The use of EQ-5D-5L as a patient-reported outcome measure in evaluating community rehabilitation services in Alberta, Canada

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to describe the characteristics and health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients accessing community rehabilitation services in Alberta, Canada, using routinely collected EQ-5D-5L data, and explore factors associated with the impact of these services.

METHODS

A retrospective, longitudinal, observational design was used. Patients completed the EQ-5D-5L and demographic questions at intake and end of rehabilitation care. Change in EQ-5D-5L dimensions from intake until end of rehabilitation was examined using the Pareto Classification of Health Change. Change scores were calculated for the EQ-5D-5L index, VAS, and total sum scores. Change groups in the EQ-5D-5L index and VAS scores, were defined by minimally important differences of 0.04 and 7.0, respectively. One level change was considered important for the total sum score. Effect size of the change in index, VAS, and total sum scores was also examined. Chi-squared tests were conducted to examine whether change in EQ-5D-5L varied by age, gender, region, and having anxiety/depression at intake.

RESULTS

Three service programs were examined; pulmonary rehabilitation (n = 542), group-based community exercise (n = 463), and physiotherapy for bone and joint care (n = 391). At intake, HRQL in all programs was lower than that of the general Alberta population norms and improved by end of rehabilitation. The mean (SD) change in index, VAS, and total sum scores were 0.02 (0.13), 6.0 (18.3), and - 0.5 (2.4) in pulmonary rehabilitation, 0.06 (0.13), 6.6 (18.7), - 1.2 (2.4) in community exercise, and 0.13 (0.16), 1.2 (0.9), and - 2.8 (2.8) in physiotherapy, respectively. Based on change of the index score, 24% deteriorated, 38% improved, and 38% had no change in pulmonary rehabilitation; 17% deteriorated, 51% improved, and 32% had no change in community exercise; 5% deteriorated, 72% improved, and 23% had no change in physiotherapy. Similar trends were seen in the VAS and total sum scores. Older age, urban region, and having anxiety/depression at intake were associated with positive change in EQ-5D-5L.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study are intended to inform program/service level decisions by describing the characteristics and HRQL of patients accessing community rehabilitation, as well as the predictors of change in health status, which will help direct future program growth and service changes.

Mobilizing registry data for quality improvement: A convergent mixed-methods analysis and application to spinal cord injury

Introduction

The rising prevalence of complex chronic conditions and growing intricacies of healthcare systems emphasizes the need for interdisciplinary partnerships to advance coordination and quality of rehabilitation care. Registry databases are increasingly used for clinical monitoring and quality improvement (QI) of health system change. Currently, it is unclear how interdisciplinary partnerships can best mobilize registry data to support QI across care settings for complex chronic conditions.

Purpose

We employed spinal cord injury (SCI) as a case study of a highly disruptive and debilitating complex chronic condition, with existing registry data that is underutilized for QI. We aimed to compare and converge evidence from previous reports and multi-disciplinary experts in order to outline the major elements of a strategy to effectively mobilize registry data for QI of care for complex chronic conditions.

Methods

This study used a convergent parallel-database variant mixed design, whereby findings from a systematic review and a qualitative exploration were analyzed independently and then simultaneously. The scoping review used a three-stage process to review 282 records, which resulted in 28 articles reviewed for analysis. Concurrent interviews were conducted with multidisciplinary-stakeholders, including leadership from condition-specific national registries, members of national SCI communities, leadership from SCI community organizations, and a person with lived experience of SCI. Descriptive analysis was used for the scoping review and qualitative description for stakeholder interviews.

Results

There were 28 articles included in the scoping review and 11 multidisciplinary-stakeholders in the semi-structured interviews. The integration of the results allowed the identification of three key learnings to enhance the successful design and use of registry data to inform the planning and development of a QI initiative: enhance utility and reliability of registry data; form a steering committee lead by clinical champions; and design effective, feasible, and sustainable QI initiatives.

Conclusion

This study highlights the importance of interdisciplinary partnerships to support QI of care for persons with complex conditions. It provides practical strategies to determine mutual priorities that promote implementation and sustained use of registry data to inform QI. Learnings from this work could enhance interdisciplinary collaboration to support QI of care for rehabilitation for persons with complex chronic conditions.

Patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs): Use during the physical therapy practice and associated factors

OBJECTIVE

To assess the current level of routine use of psychosocial-related patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) in physical therapy practice and which physical therapist-level factors are associated with the use of these measurement instruments.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey study among Spanish physical therapists involved in the treatment of LBP patients in Public Health Service, Mutual Insurance Companies, and private practice during 2020. Descriptive analyses were conducted for reporting the number and instruments utilized. Thus, sociodemographic and professional features differences between PTs using and not using PROM were analyzed.

RESULTS

From 485 physiotherapists completing the questionnaire nationwide, 484 were included. A minority of therapists routinely used psychosocial-related PROMs (13.8%) in LBP patients and only 6.8% did so through standardized measurements instruments. The Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (28.8%) and the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (15.1%) were used most frequently. Physiotherapists working in Andalucía and País Vasco regions, in private practice environments, educated in psychosocial factors evaluation and management, considering psychosocial factors during the clinical practice and expecting patients' collaborative attitudes demonstrated significantly greater use of PROMS (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that the majority of physiotherapists in Spain do not use PROMs for evaluating LBP (86.2%). From those physiotherapists using PROMs, approximately the half use validated instruments such as the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia or the Pain Catastrophizing Scale while the other half limit their evaluation to anamnesis and non-validated questionnaires. Therefore, developing effective strategies to implement and facilitate the use of psychosocial-related PROMs would enhance the evaluation during the clinical practice.

Developing tailored intervention strategies for implementation of stratified care to low back pain with physiotherapists in Nigeria: a Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Stratified care approach involving use of the STarT-Back tool to optimise care for patients with low back pain is gaining widespread attention in western countries. However, adoption and implementation of this approach in low-and-middle-income countries will be restricted by context-specific factors that need to be addressed. This study aimed to develop with physiotherapists, tailored intervention strategies for the implementation of stratified care for patients with low back pain.

METHODS

A two-round web-based Delphi survey was conducted among purposively sampled physiotherapists with a minimum of three years of clinical experience, with post-graduation certification or specialists. Thirty statements on barriers and enablers for implementation were extracted from the qualitative phase. Statements were rated by a Delphi panel with additional open-ended feedback. After each Delphi round, participants received feedback which informed their subsequent responses. Additional qualitative feedback were analysed using qualitative content analysis. The criteria for consensus and stability were pre-determined using percentage agreement (≥ 75%), median value (≥ 4), Inter-quartile range (≤ 1), and Wilcoxon matched-pairs test respectively.

RESULTS

Participants in the first round were 139 and 125 of them completed the study, yielding a response rate of 90%. Participants were aged 35.2 (SD6.6) years, and 55 (39.6%) were female. Consensus was achieved in 25/30 statements. Wilcoxon's test showed stability in responses after the 5 statements failed to reach consensus: 'translate the STarT-Back Tool to pidgin language' 71% (p = 0.76), 'begin implementation with government hospitals' 63% (p = 0.11), 'share knowledge with traditional bone setters' 35% (p = 0.67), 'get second opinion on clinician's advice' 63% (p = 0.24) and 'carry out online consultations' 65% (p = 0.41). Four statements strengthened by additional qualitative data achieved the highest consensus: 'patient education' (96%), 'quality improvement appraisals' (96%), 'undergraduate training on psychosocial care' (96%) and 'patient-clinician communication' (95%).

CONCLUSION

There was concordance of opinion that patients should be educated to correct misplaced expectations and proper time for communication is vital to implementation. This communication should be learned at undergraduate level, and for already qualified clinicians, quality improvement appraisals are key to sustained and effective care. These recommendations provide a framework for future research on monitored implementation of stratified care in middle-income countries.

Developing key performance indicators for the Canadian chiropractic profession: a modified Delphi study

Background

The purpose of this study is to develop a list of performance indicators to assess the status of the chiropractic profession in Canada.

Method

We conducted a 4-round modified Delphi technique (March 2018–January 2020) to reach consensus among experts and stakeholders on key status indicators for the chiropractic profession using online questionnaires. During the first round, experts suggested indicators for preidentified themes. Through the following two rounds, the importance and feasibility of each indicator was rated on an 11-point Likert scale, and their related potential sources of data identified. In the final round, provincial stakeholders were recruited to rate the importance of the indicators within the 90th percentile and identified those most important to their organisation.

Results

The first round generated 307 preliminary indicators of which 42 were selected for the remaining rounds, and eleven were preferentially selected by most of the provincial stakeholders. Experts agreed the feasibility of all indicators was high, and that data could be collected through a combination of data obtained from professional liability insurance records and survey(s) of the general population, patients, and chiropractors.

Conclusions

A set of performance indicators to assess the status of the Canadian chiropractic profession emerged from a scientific and stakeholder consensus.

A practice test and selection of a core set of outcome-based quality indicators in Dutch primary care physical therapy for patients with COPD: a cohort study

Aim

To estimate the comparability and discriminability of outcome-based quality indicators by performing a practice test in Dutch physical therapy primary care, and to select a core set of outcome-based quality indicators that are well accepted by physical therapists based on their perceived added value as a quality improvement tool.

Methods

First, a list of potential quality indicators was defined, followed by determination of the comparability (case-mix adjusted multilevel analysis) and discriminability (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)). Second, focus group meetings were conducted with stakeholders (physical therapists and senior researchers) to select a core set of quality indicators.

Results

Overall, 229 physical therapists from 137 practices provided 2651 treatment episodes. Comparability: in 10 of the 11 case-mix adjusted models, the ICC increased compared with the intercept-only model. Discriminability: the ICC ranged between 0.01 and 0.34, with five of the 11 ICCs being >0.10. The majority of physical therapists in each focus group preferred the inclusion of seven quality indicators in the core set, including three process and four outcome indicators based upon the 6-min walk test (6MWT), the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), and the determination of quadriceps strength using a hand-held dynamometer.

Conclusion

This is the first study to describe the comparability and discriminability of the outcome-based quality indicators selected for patients with COPD treated in primary care physical therapy practices. Future research should focus on increasing data collection in daily practice and on the development of tangible methods to use as the core set of a quality improvement tool.

The major finding of this study is that all participants in the focus groups accepted the quality indicators as a quality improvement tool based on their perceived added value and selected a core set of seven outcome-based quality indicators for COPD.https://bit.ly/3NJuQtq

Experiences of physiotherapists regarding a standard set of measurement instruments to improve quality of care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a mixed methods study

RATIONALE

The quality of physiotherapy care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can be improved by comparing outcomes of care in practice.

AIM

To evaluate the experiences of physiotherapists implementing a standard set of measurement instruments to measure outcomes and improve the quality of care for patients with COPD.

METHODS

This sequential explanatory mixed methods study was performed in two parts. In the quantitative part, a survey of 199 physiotherapists was conducted to evaluate their attitudes and knowledge, as well as the influence of contextual factors (i.e., practice policy and support from colleagues), in the implementation of the standard measurement set. In the qualitative part, 11 physiotherapists participated in individual interviews to elucidate their experiences using a thematical framework.

RESULTS

The survey showed that, on average, 68.4% of the physiotherapists reported having a positive attitude about using the standard set, 85.0% felt they had sufficient knowledge of the measurement instruments, and 84.7% felt supported by practice policy and colleagues. In total, 80.3% of physiotherapists thought the standard set had added value in clinical practice, and 90.3% indicated that the measurement instruments can be valuable for evaluating treatment outcomes. The physiotherapists mentioned several barriers, such as lack of time and the unavailability of the entire standard set of measurement instruments in their practice. Moreover, the physiotherapists indicated that the measurement instruments have added value in providing transparency to policymakers through the anonymized publication of outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Physiotherapists support the use of the standard set of measurement instruments to improve the quality of physiotherapy treatment for patients with COPD.

Personalised Outcomes Forecasts of Supervised Exercise Therapy in Intermittent Claudication: An Application of Neighbours Based Prediction Methods with Routinely Collected Clinical Data

OBJECTIVE

Insights regarding individual patient prognosis may improve exercise therapy by informing patient expectations, promoting exercise adherence, and facilitating tailored care. Therefore, the aim was to develop and evaluate personalised outcomes forecasts for functional claudication distance over six months of supervised exercise therapy for patients with intermittent claudication.

METHODS

Data of 5 940 patients were eligible for analysis. Neighbours based predictions were generated via an adaptation of predictive mean matching. Data from the nearest 223 matches (a.k.a. neighbours) for an index patient were modelled via Generalised Additive Model for Location Scale and Shape (GAMLSS). The realised outcome measures were then evaluated against the GAMLSS model, and the average bias, coverage, and precision were calculated. Model calibration was analysed via within sample and of sample analyses.

RESULTS

Neighbours based predictions demonstrated small average bias (- 0.04 standard deviations; ideal = 0) and accurate average coverage (48.7% of realised data within 50% prediction interval; ideal = 50%). Moreover, neighbours based predictions improved prediction precision by 24%, compared with estimates derived from the whole sample. Both within sample and of sample testing showed predictions to be well calibrated.

CONCLUSION

Neighbours based prediction is a method for generating accurate personalised outcomes forecasts for patients with intermittent claudication undertaking supervised exercise therapy. Future work should examine the influence of personalised outcomes forecasts on clinical decisions and patient outcomes.

Therapist perceptions of the Danish Physiotherapy Research Database for assessing patients with chronic disease

Background

The Danish Physiotherapy Research Database for chronic patients receiving Free of Charge Physiotherapy (PhysDB-FCP) was piloted over a 1-year period. The purpose of the PhysDB-FCP is to provide a user friendly digital online structured tool that standardizes initial and follow up clinical assessments generating data that can be used for clinical decision making and support future research in physiotherapy for patients with chronic disease. Although initial assessments were completed, the attrition rate was 73% and 90% at 3- and 6- months, respectively, which suggests problems with the current tool.

Objective

To evaluate the perspectives of the physiotherapists that used the PhysDB-FCP and propose changes to the tool based on this feedback.

Materials and methods

Fifty of the 103 physiotherapists introduced to the PhysDB-FCP completed an anonymous online survey. Physiotherapists were asked Likert/categorical and yes/no questions on experiences with the PhysDB-FCP within their practice, perceptions of patient experiences, suitability of the resources and support provided by the PhysDB-FCP working group and the ideal administration frequency of the assessments within the PhysDB-FCP. Open ended feedback on possible improvements to the PhysDB-FCP was also collected.

Results

Physiotherapists agreed that the PhysDB-FCP was useful for taking a physiotherapy assessment (74%) and the patient survey was useful for goal setting (72%). Although physiotherapists felt the PhysDB-FCP was well-defined (82%), only 36% would like to use a similar tool again. Generally, the PhysDB-FCP was too time-consuming, administered too frequently and included irrelevant items. For example, 72% of physiotherapists took >45 min to administer the assessment in the first consultation which was performed over multiple sessions.

Conclusions

The perspectives of physiotherapists using The PhysDB-FCP suggest specific changes that will ensure better use of the tool in future practice. Changes will likely involve administering the assessment less frequently (every 6-months to 1-year), shortening the assessment, and using diagnosis-specific assessment items.

Using a Learning Health System to Improve Physical Therapy Care for Patients With Intermittent Claudication: Lessons Learned From the ClaudicatioNet Quality System

Routinely collected outcomes data can be used to improve physical therapy care through benchmarking, personalization, continued education, and treatment optimization. This article describes how a nationwide infrastructure to routinely collect data from daily practice was created and how these data were used through a support system (called the ClaudicatioNet Quality system) to improve physical therapy care for patients with intermittent claudication in the Netherlands. ClaudicatioNet is a nationwide network of 2100 specialized physical therapists, providing high-quality supervised exercise therapy in combination with lifestyle counseling. The ClaudicatioNet Quality system uses a large national registry in which specific relevant health outcomes have been routinely collected since 2015. These data have then been used in turn to assess quality of care and provide transparency to therapists and other stakeholders. The Quality system is intended to serve as a learning health system, to support continuous learning at the therapist, practice, and network level. In this approach, individual patients and physical therapists are provided with opportunities to personalize, benchmark, and evaluate (and possibly alter) a treatment plan using routinely collected data from historical patients. The Quality system is described based on the essential elements of a learning health system. The challenges and lessons learned in developing the Quality system also are described.

IMPACT

The use of routinely collected health outcomes can, if implemented correctly, facilitate continuous learning among physical therapists and contribute to person-centered care. This example of a learning health system might serve as a blueprint for physical therapists on how to optimally implement and distill meaning from routinely collected clinical data.

Are patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) useful in low back pain? Experiences of physiotherapists in primary health care in Sweden

BACKGROUND

Physiotherapists in primary health care are required to use patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) to manage patients with low back pain (LBP).

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to explore and describe how physiotherapists in primary care managing patients with LBP, experience the use of PROMs with a focus on facilitating and hindering factors.

METHODS

We undertook a qualitative study with semi-structured interviews. Fifteen physiotherapists (9 female and 6 male) were included. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim and analysed by inductive manifest content analysis.

RESULTS

Our findings resulted in eight main categories: PROMs give structure and increase patient involvement; Patients' motivations to use PROMs; Time and the physiotherapist's clinical priorities; Physiotherapists' routines steer their use of PROMs; Physiotherapists' competences in using PROMs; Organizations and managers steer the use of PROMs; Prerequisites for future use of PROMs; Using PROMs develops the physiotherapy profession.

CONCLUSION

Our findings show that using PROMs gives structure and increases patient involvement, but the patient's motivation to use PROMs needs to be taken into consideration. Time and routines influence the use of PROMs and these factors depend on organizational and managerial levels. Using PROMs is believed to help develop the physiotherapy profession. Prerequisites for future use, such as digitalization and increased competence, need to be fulfilled. Future studies should focus on increasing physiotherapists' knowledge about relevant PROMs, and study implementation in clinical practice, thereby improving the physiotherapy profession's quality of care.

Clinical Practice Guideline for Physical Therapist Management of People With Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

This guideline revises the 2008 Royal Dutch Society for Physical Therapy guideline for physical therapy for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHOD

This revised guideline was developed according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation tool and the Guidelines International Network standards. A multidisciplinary guideline panel formulated clinical questions based on perceived barriers in current care. For every clinical question, a narrative or systematic literature review was undertaken, where appropriate. The guideline panel formulated recommendations based on the results of the literature reviews, the values and preferences of patients and clinicians, and the acceptability, feasibility, and costs, as described in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation evidence-to-decision framework.

RESULTS

The eventual guideline describes a comprehensive assessment based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Core Set for RA. It also includes a description of yellow and red flags to support direct access. Based on the assessment, 3 treatment profiles are distinguished: (1) education and exercise instructions with limited supervision, (2) education and short-term supervised exercise therapy, and (3) education and intensified supervised exercise therapy. Education includes RA-related information, advice, and self-management support. Exercises are based on recommendations concerning the desired frequency, intensity, type, and time-related characteristics of the exercises (FITT factors). Their interpretation is compliant with the individual patient's situation and with public health recommendations for health-enhancing physical activity. Recommended measurement instruments for monitoring and evaluation include the Patient-Specific Complaint instrument, Numeric Rating Scales for pain and fatigue, the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index, and the 6-minute walk test.

CONCLUSION

An evidence-based physical therapy guideline was delivered, providing ready-to-use recommendations on the assessment and treatment of patients with RA. An active implementation strategy to enhance its use in daily practice is advised.

IMPACT

This evidence-based practice guideline guides the physical therapist in the treatment of patients with RA. The cornerstones of physical therapist treatment for patients with RA are active exercise therapy in combination with education. Passive interventions such as massage, electrotherapy, thermotherapy, low-level laser therapy, ultrasound, and medical taping play a subordinate role.

Reliability, validity and discriminability of patient reported outcomes for non-specific low back pain in a nationwide physical therapy registry: A retrospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

A national clinical registry was established in the Netherlands containing data directly sampled from electronic health record systems of physical therapists (PTs). This registry aims to evaluate the potential of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) to develop quality indicators (QIs) in physical therapy care.

PURPOSE

To test to what extent the collected PROM data are reliable, valid and discriminatory between practices in measuring outcomes of patients with non-specific low back pain (NSLBP).

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study 865 PT practices with 6,560 PTs voluntarily collected PROM data of patients with NSLBP, using the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS), the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and the Patient Specific Functioning Scale (PSFS). Reliability was determined by analysing the completeness of the dataset, the comparability by using national reference data, and through checking selection bias in the included patients. Validity was tested using the known-groups contrast between patients with (sub)acute vs. chronic NSLBP. To determine discriminative ability of outcomes between PT practices, case-mix corrected hierarchical multilevel analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Reliability was sufficient by confirming fifteen of the sixteen hypotheses: 59% of all patients opted in for data analysis, 42% of these included patients showed repeated measurement, comparing with reference data and potential selection bias showed < 5% between group differences, while differences between (sub)acute and chronic NSLB-groups were significantly larger than 5% (less treatment sessions, lager differences in outcomes in (sub)acute NSLB patients). In addition, all nine adjusted hierarchical multilevel models confirm that the collected dataset on outcomes in PT care is able to discriminate between practices using PROM results of patients with NSLBP (ICC-scores range 0.11-0.21).

LIMITATIONS

Although we have shown the reliability, validity and discriminative ability of the dataset in the quest to develop QIs, we are aware that reducing missing values in patient records and the selective participation of PTs that belong to the innovators needs attention in the next stages of implementation to avoid bias in the results.

CONCLUSION

PROMs of patients with NSLBP collected in the national clinical registry of KNGF are reliable, valid and able to discriminate between primary care PT practices.

Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Quality Indicators in Dutch Primary Care Physical Therapy for Patients With Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to define and select a core set of outcome-based quality indicators, accepted by stakeholders on usability and perceived added value as a quality improvement tool, and to formulate recommendations for the next implementation step.

METHODS

In phase 1, 15 potential quality indicators were defined for patient-reported outcome measures and associated domains, namely the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) for pain intensity, the Patient Specific Functioning Scale (PSFS) for physical activity, the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale for physical functioning, and the Global Perceived Effect-Dutch Version for perceived effect. Their comparability and discriminatory characteristics were described using cohort data. In phase 2, a core set of quality indicators was selected based on consensus among stakeholders in focus group meetings.

RESULTS

In total, 65,815 completed treatment episodes for patients with nonspecific low back pain were provided by 1009 physical therapists from 219 physical therapist practices. The discriminability between physical therapists of all potential 15 quality indicators was adequate, with intraclass correlation coefficients between 0.08 and 0.30. Stakeholders selected a final core set of 6 quality indicators: 2 process indicators (the routine measurement of NPRS and the PSFS) and 4 outcome indicators (pretreatment and posttreatment change scores for the NPRS, PSFS, Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, and the minimal clinically important difference of the Global Perceived Effect-Dutch Version).

CONCLUSION

This study described and selected a core set of outcome-based quality indicators for physical therapy in patients with nonspecific low back pain. The set was accepted by stakeholders for having added value for daily practice in physical therapy primary care and was found useful for quality improvement initiatives. Further studies need to focus on improvement of using the core set of outcome-based quality indicators as a quality monitoring and evaluation instrument.

IMPACT

Patient-reported outcome-based quality indicators developed from routinely collected clinical data are promising for use in quality improvement in daily practice.

Cohort profile: Design and implementation of the Danish Physiotherapy Research Database for patients receiving primary care with chronic disease

PURPOSE

Free of charge physiotherapy (FCP) is free physiotherapy provided by the Danish government for patients with a range of chronic diseases. To date, the population has not been described in depth making evaluation and decision making difficult. The purpose of this study was to (1) describe the development and the content of a novel clinical physiotherapy database for FCP (PhysDB-FCP) and (2) present the cohort profile based on the data collected.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety-nine clinics (17 460 FCP patients) were invited to participate in the development process from 2018 to 2019. Eleven clinics consented (2780 FCP patients) and 534 patients performed the physiotherapy assessment using the PhysDB-FCP tool, with 393/534 completing the patient survey.

FINDINGS TO DATE

The content of the PhysDB-FCP was developed through an iterative process involving consensus between clinical and research workgroups. Prior to using the tool all consenting sites received training to use/administer the tool. All data were collected/stored using the PhysDB-FCP. Items finally chosen for the PhysDB-FCP included demographic information, questions about health status and daily functioning, functional tests, treatment plan and validated questionnaires. The initial patient cohort composed of 63.4% women with main diagnoses of multiple sclerosis (22.7%) and Parkinson's disease (17.0%). The ability to perform personal/instrumental activities of daily living and functional ability varied widely. Other non-physiotherapy related issues were identified in numerous patients (ie, 34.9% of patients were at risk of depression) and multidisciplinary interventional approaches could be considered.

FUTURE PLANS

The current study has provided a comprehensive description of patients receiving FCP, using data collected from the novel PhysDB-FCP. Collected information can be used to facilitate microlevel to macrolevel programme evaluation and decisions. Although the PhysDB-FCP is promising, the tool requires optimisation before it is implemented regionally and/or nationally.

Implementing Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Outpatient Rehabilitation Settings: A Systematic Review of Facilitators and Barriers Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review examines the facilitators and barriers to the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in outpatient rehabilitation settings and provides strategies to improve care to maximize patient outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

Eleven databases were systematically searched from November 2018 to May 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently assessed articles based on the following inclusion criteria: English text, evaluate barriers and facilitators, include PROMs, and occur in an outpatient rehabilitation setting (physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech language pathology, or athletic training). Of the 10,164 articles initially screened, 15 articles were included in this study.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted from the selected articles by 2 independent reviewers and put into an extraction template and into the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) model. The Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (AXIS) was conducted on each study to assess study design, risk of bias, and reporting quality of the eligible studies.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Ten studies were identified as high quality, according to the AXIS. Based on the CFIR model, the top barriers identified focused on clinician training and time in the implementation process, lack of recognized value and knowledge at the individual level, lack of access and support in the inner setting, and inability of patients to complete PROMs in the intervention process. Facilitators were identified as education in the implementation process, support and availability of PROMs in the inner setting, and recognized value at the individual level.

CONCLUSIONS

More barriers than facilitators have been identified, which is consistent with PROM underuse. Clinicians and administrators should find opportunities to overcome the barriers identified and leverage the facilitators to improve routine PROM use and maximize patient outcomes.

Relationships Between Context, Process, and Outcome Indicators to Assess Quality of Physiotherapy Care in Patients with Whiplash-Associated Disorders: Applying Donabedian's Model of Care

BACKGROUND

Quality indicators (QIs) are measurable elements of practice performance and may relate to context, process, outcome and structure. A valid set of QIs have been developed, reflecting the clinical reasoning used in primary care physiotherapy for patients with whiplash-associated disorders (WAD). Donabedian's model postulates relationships between the constructs of quality of care, acting in a virtuous circle.

AIM

To explore the relative strengths of the relationships between context, process, and outcome indicators in the assessment of primary care physiotherapy in patients with WAD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data on WAD patients (N=810) were collected over a period of 16 years in primary care physiotherapy practices by means of patients records. This routinely collected dataset (RCD-WAD) was classified in context, process, and outcome variables and analyzed retrospectively. Clinically relevant variables were selected based on expert consensus. Associations were expressed, using zero-order, as Spearman rank correlation coefficients (criterion: rs >0.25 [minimum: fair]; α-value = 0.05).

RESULTS

In round 1, 62 of 85 (72.9%) variables were selected by an expert panel as relevant for clinical reasoning; in round 2, 34 of 62 (54.8%) (context variables 9 of 18 [50.0%]; process variables 18 of 34 [52.9]; outcome variables 8 of 10 [90.0%]) as highly relevant. Associations between the selected context and process variables ranged from 0.27 to 0.53 (p≤0.00), between selected context and outcome variables from 0.26 to 0.55 (p≤0.00), and between selected process and outcome variables from 0.29 to 0.59 (p≤0.00). Moderate associations (rs >0.50; p≤0.00) were found between "pain coping" and "fear avoidance" as process variables, and "pain intensity" and "functioning" as outcome variables.

CONCLUSION

The identified associations between selected context, process, and outcome variables were fair to moderate. Ongoing work may clarify some of these associations and provide guidance to physiotherapists on how best to improve the quality of clinical reasoning in terms of relationships between context, process, and outcome in the management of patients with WAD.

Which Factors Influence the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Dutch Physiotherapy Practice? A Cross-Sectional Study

Purpose: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have the potential to enhance the quality of health care but, as a result of suboptimal implementation, it is unclear whether they fulfil this role in physiotherapy practice. This cross-sectional study aimed to identify the factors influencing PROM use in Dutch private physiotherapy practices. Method: A total of 444 physiotherapists completed a self-assessment questionnaire and uploaded the data from their electronic health record (EHR) systems to the national registry of outcome data. Univariate and multivariate ordinal logistic and linear regression analysis were used to identify the factors associated with self-reported PROM use and PROM use registered in the EHR systems, which were derived from the self-assessment questionnaire and from the data in the national registry, respectively. Five categories with nine independent variables were selected as potential factors for regression analysis. The similarity between self-reported and registered PROM use was verified. Results: On the basis of self-report and EHR report, we found that 21.6% and 29.8% of participants, respectively, used PROMs with more than 80% of their patients, and we identified the factors associated with PROM use. Conclusions: The factors associated with PROM use are EHR systems that support PROM use and more knowledge about PROM use. These findings can guide future strategies to enhance the use of PROMs in physiotherapy practice.

Development of a Standard Set of Outcome Domains and Proposed Measures for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Primary Care Physical Therapy Practice in the Netherlands: a Modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method

Background

Standardization of measures in a common set opens the opportunity to learn from differences in treatment outcomes which can be used for improving the quality of care. Furthermore, a standard set can provide the basis for development of quality indicators and is therefore useful for quality improvement and public reporting purposes. The aim of this study was to develop a standard set of outcome domains and proposed measures for patients with COPD in Dutch primary care physical therapy practice, including a proposal to stratify patients in subgroups.

Material and methods

A consensus-driven modified RAND-UCLA appropriateness method was conducted with relevant stakeholders (patients, physical therapists, researchers, policy makers and health insurers) in Dutch primary physical therapy care in eight steps: (1) literature search, (2) first online survey, (3) patient interviews, (4) expert meeting, resulting in a concept standard set and methods to identify subgroups' (5) consensus meeting, (6) expert meeting (7) second online survey and (8) final approval of an advisory board resulting of the approved standard set.

Results

Five outcome domains were selected for COPD: physical capacity, muscle strength, physical activity, dyspnea and quality of life. A total of 21 measures were rated and discussed. Finally, eight measures were included, of which four mandatory measures: Characteristics of practices and physical therapists, Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) for quality of life, Global Perceived Effect (GPE) for experience, 6-mins Walk Test (6-MWT) for physical capacity; two conditional measures: Hand-Held Dynamometer (HHD) (with Microfet™) for Quadriceps strength, Medical Research Council Dyspnea (MRC) for monitoring dyspnea; and two exploratory measures: Accelerometry for physical activity, and the Assessment of Burden of COPD tool (ABC). To identify subgroups, a method described in the Dutch standard of care from the Lung Alliance was included.

Conclusion

This study described the development of a standard set of outcome domains and proposed measures for patients with COPD in primary care physical therapy. Each measure was accepted for relevance and feasibility by the involved stakeholders. The set is currently used in daily practice and tested on validity and reliability in a pilot for the development of quality indicators.

Exploring the perspective of patients with musculoskeletal health problems in primary care on the use of patient-reported outcome measures to stimulate quality improvement in physiotherapist practice; a qualitative study

Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical practice might enhance patient- centeredness and effectiveness of physiotherapy practice. Although patients have a crucial role in using PROMs, little is known about their perspective on its usefulness.Purpose: Explore the perspective of patients with musculoskeletal health problems on using PROMs for quality improvement in primary care physiotherapy practice, and determine what barriers and facilitators patients perceive.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were performed in 21 patients recruited from primary care physiotherapy practice and analyzed using theoretical thematic analysis. Barriers and facilitators on PROMs implementation were categorized into four predefined domains conform.Results: Across all domains, three major themes were identified: 1) Practicality; 2) Interaction with the physiotherapist for decision-making; and 3) Sharing information outside the clinical context. Generally, PROMs were perceived practically applicable instruments with added value to the interaction with the physiotherapist for shared decision-making and for stimulating quality improvement. The perceived barriers were: difficulties in administering PROMs for patients with poor computer skills, suboptimal efficiency when PROMs were administered at the expense of the consultation, the insufficient added value of PROMs for patients with recurrent health problems, and reluctance about sharing aggregated data for accountability purposes.Limitations: The dependence on the participating physiotherapists in patient recruitment might have resulted in selection bias.Conclusion: Patients perceive that using PROMs has an added value in primary care physiotherapy practice. Optimizing implementation using tailored implementation strategies related to the identified barriers in all four domains might further improve the use of PROMs in clinical practice.

Development of a standard set of outcome measures for non-specific low back pain in Dutch primary care physiotherapy practices: a Delphi study

PURPOSE

To develop a clinical standard set of outcome measures that are accepted for relevance and feasibility by stakeholders and useful for (a) interaction between patient and the professional, e.g. shared decision-making in goal-setting, monitoring and feedback based on outcomes, (b) internal quality improvement, and (c) external transparency in patients with non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) in primary care physical therapy.

METHODS

We used a consensus-driven modified RAND-UCLA Delphi method in seven steps with panellists (patients, representatives of patient and physiotherapy associations, researchers, policy makers, health insurers): (1) literature search, (2) first online survey, (3) patient interviews, (4) an experts meeting, (5) a consensus meeting, (6) second online survey, and (7) final approval of an advisory board. Steps 1-4 resulted in potential outcome measures. In the consensus meeting after discussion panellists voted for inclusion per measure. In the second online survey the final standard set was rated on relevance and feasibility on a 9-point Likert scale; when the median score was ≥ 7, the standard set was accepted and finally approved.

RESULTS

Thirteen draft outcome measures were rated and discussed, and finally, six outcome measures were accepted. The standard set includes the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, Oswestry Disability Index, Patient-Specific Functional Scale, Numeric Pain Rating Scale, Global Perceived Effect (GPE-DV), and the STarT Back Screening Tool (SBT).

CONCLUSION

This study presents a standard set of outcome measures for patients with NSLBP in primary care physiotherapy accepted for relevance and feasibility by stakeholders. The standard set is currently used in daily practice and tested on validity and reliability in a pilot study. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

The facilitators and barriers to implementing patient reported outcome measures in organisations delivering health related services: a systematic review of reviews

Background

There is increasing interest in using Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) within organisations delivering health related services. However, organisations have had mixed success in implementing PROMs and there is little understanding about why this may be. Thus, the purpose of this study was to identify the facilitators and barriers to implementing PROMs in organisations.

Method

A systematic review of reviews was undertaken. Searches were conducted of five electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, during the week of the 20th February 2017. Additional search methods included website searching and reference checking. To be included, a publication had to be a review of the literature, describe its methods and include information related to implementing PROMs. The reviews were extracted using a standardised form and assessed for their risk of bias using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews tool. The findings were synthesised using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. The protocol was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database (PROSPERO) (CRD42017057491).

Results

Initially 2047 records were identified. After assessing eligibility, six reviews were included. These reviews varied in their review type and focus. Different issues arose at distinct stages of the implementation process. Organisations needed to invest time and resources in two key stages early in the implementation process: ‘designing’ the processes for using PROMs within an organisation; and ‘preparing’ an organisation and its staff. The ‘designing’ stage involved organisations planning not just which PROMs to use and how to administer them, but also how the data would be used for clinical purposes. The ‘preparing’ stage involved getting an organisation and its staff ready to use PROMs, particularly persuading clinicians of the validity and value of PROMs, delivering training, and developing electronic systems. Having an implementation lead overseeing the process and developing the process based on feedback were also identified as facilitating implementation.

Conclusion

Organisations implementing PROMs need to invest time and resources in ‘designing’ the PROMs strategy and ‘preparing’ the organisation to use PROMs. Focusing on these earlier stages may prevent problems arising when PROMs are used in practice.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s41687-018-0072-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Using Patient Reported Outcomes Measures to Promote Integrated Care

INTRODUCTION

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been introduced as standardised outcomes, but have not been implemented widely for disease targeted pathways of care, nor for geriatric patients who prefer functional performance and quality of life.

DISCUSSION

We describe innovative multipurpose implementation of PROMs as evidenced by two best practices of PROMs application in geriatric and physiotherapy practice. We show that PROMs can show meaningful outcomes in older subjects' patient journeys, which can at the same time serve individuals and groups of both patients and professionals.

KEY LESSON

PROMs can deliver generic outcomes relevant for older patients, may improve patient-physician relationship, quality of care and prediction of future outcomes in geriatric care, if they are valid, reliable and responsive, but still short and simple. A precondition to make the hard tip from research to practice is that PROMs are carefully positioned in the clinical encounters and in electronic health records.

Impact of Self- and Peer Assessment on the Clinical Performance of Physiotherapists in Primary Care: A Cohort Study

Purpose: This study evaluated the impact of a quality improvement programme based on self- and peer assessment to justify nationwide implementation. Method: Four professional networks of physiotherapists in The Netherlands (n = 379) participated in the programme, which consisted of two cycles of online self-assessment and peer assessment using video recordings of client communication and clinical records. Assessment was based on performance indicators that could be scored on a 5-point Likert scale, and online assessment was followed by face-to-face feedback discussions. After cycle 1, participants developed personal learning goals. These goals were analyzed thematically, and goal attainment was measured using a questionnaire. Improvement in performance was tested with multilevel regression analyses, comparing the self-assessment and peer-assessment scores in cycles 1 and 2. Results: In total, 364 (96%) of the participants were active in online self-assessment and peer assessment. However, online activities varied between cycle 1 and cycle 2 and between client communication and recordkeeping. Personal goals addressed client-centred communication (54%), recordkeeping (24%), performance and outcome measurement (15%), and other (7%). Goals were completely attained (29%), partly attained (64%), or not attained at all (7%). Self-assessment and peer-assessment scores improved significantly for both client communication (self-assessment = 11%; peer assessment = 8%) and recordkeeping (self-assessment = 7%; peer assessment = 4%). Conclusions: Self-assessment and peer assessment are effective in enhancing commitment to change and improving clinical performance. Nationwide implementation of the programme is justified. Future studies should address the impact on client outcomes.