Corrigendum: Quality of life and quality of education among physiotherapy students in Europe.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1344028.].

Quality of life and quality of education among physiotherapy students in Europe.

Background: The study of physiotherapy is challenging and can affect the students' well-being and quality of life. The aim of this study was to describe and compare factors that could affect well-being among students across Europe. Methods: In this descriptive cross-sectional study using an online questionnaire survey, students of bachelor's physiotherapy programs from 23 European faculties, from 8 countries, were interviewed on mental health and stress burden, sleep quality, dietary habits, and physical activity. Results: Although 75% of students rated their quality of life positively and 47% were satisfied with their mental health, 65% showed higher levels of stress and 51% described impaired sleep quality. The minimum physical activity of 150 min weekly was described by 79% of students, within which 67% engaged in strengthening twice a week. Students with a higher stress load/worse psychological health also showed worse sleep quality and lower amount of physical activity, women were significantly worse off. In terms of physical activity and sleep quality, students from Finland and Kosovo achieved the best results, while students from Italy, Greece, and Portugal achieved the worst. Students from Italy indicated the greatest dissatisfaction with the organisation of the study system and communication with teachers, while in Kosovo students rated the communication and study organisation the highest. All students had a problem with adhering to nutritional habits. Students from Italy and Spain, with the lowest body mass indexes and weight averages, were closest to the nutrition recommendations. Conclusion: We demonstrated that physiotherapy students are burdened with stress, suffer from sleep disorders, and do not follow the recommendations regarding nutrition nor physical activity. There are significant differences between universities and countries in some aspects.

Content and Delivery of Physical Therapy in Multiple Sclerosis across Europe: A Survey.

Background: Guidelines and general recommendations are available for multiple sclerosis rehabilitation, but no specific guidance exists for physical therapists. Describing aspects of physical therapy content and delivery in multiple sclerosis and its determinants and analysing whether general recommendations connected with physical therapy are implemented in practice is important for interpreting clinical and research evidence. Methods: An online cross-sectional survey of physical therapists specialized in multiple sclerosis (212 specialists from 26 European countries) was used. Results: There was distinct diversity in service delivery and content across Europe. Perceived accessibility of physical therapy varied from most accessible in the Western region, and least in the Southern region. Sixty-four physical therapists adjusted their approach according to different disability levels, less so in the Eastern region. Duration, frequency and dose of sessions differed between regions, being highest in Southern and Western regions. "Hands on treatment" was the most commonly used therapeutic approach in all apart from the Northern regions, where "word instruction" (providing advice and information) prevailed. Conclusions: The content and delivery of physical therapy differs across Europe. Recommendations concerning access to treatment and adjustment according to disability do not appear to be widely implemented in clinical practice.

Physiotherapeutic interventions in multiple sclerosis across Europe: Regions and other factors that matter.

BACKGROUND: A wide variety of interventions exists in physical therapy (PT), but knowledge about their use across different geographical regions is limited. This study investigated the use of PT interventions in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) across Europe. It aimed to determine whether regions differ in applying interventions, and explore whether factors other than regions play a role in their use. METHODS: In an online cross-sectional survey, 212 respondents from 115 European workplaces providing PT services to people with MS representing 26 countries (four European regions) participated. Cluster analysis, Pearson Chi-squared test and a Poisson regression model were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Thirteen of 45 listed PT interventions were used by more than 75% of centers, while nine interventions were used by less than 25%. For 12 interventions, regions differed markedly in their use. Cluster analysis of centers identified four clusters similar in their intervention use. Cluster assignment did not fully align with regions. While center region was important, center size, number and gender of physical therapists working in the center, and time since qualification also played a role. Cluster analysis exploring the use of the interventions provided the basis for a categorization of PT interventions in line with their primary focus: 1. Physical activity (fitness/endurance/resistance) training; 2. Neuroproprioceptive "facilitation/inhibition"; 3. Motor/skill acquisition (individualized therapy led); 4. Technology based interventions. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this is the first study that has explored this topic in MS. The results broaden our understanding of the different PT interventions used in MS, as well as the context of their use.