What are patients' perspectives on the value of physical therapy? A prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: To assess and identify patients' perceptions about the overall value of physical therapy services for musculoskeletal conditions and how these values were associated with their outcomes. METHODS: The association between the perceived value of physical therapy (as a score) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) pain interference and physical function at 6-weeks was assessed in a prospective cohort. Generalised linear models were used to identify relationships between the value of physical therapy score and PROMIS outcomes. Kendall's tau was used to identify correlations between responses and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 133 participants met the final inclusion criteria. The majority of participants were female (63.9%) with a mean age of 55.53 (SD 15.36) years. A majority of participants (63.9%) reported a previous positive personal experience with physical therapy. There was no significant relationship between perceived value of physical therapy and pain interference (ß -0.32, p = 0.07, 95% CI-0.67, 0.03) or physical function (ß 0.19, p = 0.29, 95% CI-0.16, 0.54). Stronger beliefs in agreement with the value of non-invasive treatment were significant, but weakly correlated with lower pain interference (r = -0.18, p = 0.048) and higher physical function scores (r = 0.22, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Participants had an overall positive perception of the value of physical therapy prior to initiating physical therapy, but this perception was not associated with 6-week pain and function outcomes. A better understanding of the driving factors encouraging patients to seek physical therapy services is needed to provide value-based care.

Evaluating and Characterizing the Scope of Care for Interventions Labeled as Manual Therapy in Low Back Pain Trials: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this scoping review was to evaluate and characterize the scope of care for low back pain that falls under the specific label of manual therapy. METHODS: PubMed database, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and SPORTDiscus were searched from journal inception through May 2022 for randomized controlled trials that investigated the treatment of low back pain using manual therapy. Terminology used to define manual therapy was extracted and categorized by using only the words included in the description of the intervention. An expert consultation phase was undertaken to gather feedback. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-six trials met final inclusion criteria, and 169 unique terms labeled as manual therapy for the treatment of low back pain were found. The most frequent terms were mobilization (29.0%), manipulation (16.0%), and thrust (6.4%). Eight percent of trials did not define or specify what type of manual therapy was used in the study. After removing duplicates, 169 unique terms emerged within 18 categories. CONCLUSIONS: Manual therapy intervention labels used in low back pain trials are highly variable. With such variation, the heterogeneity of the intervention in trials is likely large, and the likelihood that different trials are comparing the same interventions is low. Researchers should consider being more judicious with the use of the term manual therapy and provide greater detail in titles, methods, and supplementary appendices in order to improve clarity, clinical applicability, and usefulness of future research. IMPACT: The ability to interpret and apply findings from manual therapy-related research for low back pain is challenging due to the heterogeneity of interventions under this umbrella term. A clear use of terminology and description of interventions by researchers will allow for improved understanding for the role of manual therapy in managing back pain.

A critical appraisal of web-based information on shoulder pain comparing biomedical vs. psychosocial information.

BACKGROUND: Websites have become a primary way for patients to access health-related information, which allows patients to not only understand their condition better but also to engage in better decision making with their health care provider. However, this can be a double-edged sword, as information patients access may not be of high quality, easily readable, or could be biased based on website authorship. This study examines the readability and content quality of common websites about shoulder pain, with a specific focus on biomedical vs. psychosocial information. METHODS: The Flesch reading-ease score (FRES) and Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL) instruments were used to assess website readability. Health on the net code of conduct (HONcode) certification and the DISCERN tool were used to evaluate the reliability and quality of information. Lastly, shoulder-specific content quality and focus was gauged using a Shoulder-specific Website Appraisal Tool (SWAT) created for this study. A systematic search protocol was used to identify popular shoulder injury websites. The websites were identified using 5 search terms (shoulder pain, shoulder muscle pain, shoulder impingement, shoulder rotator cuff pain, and shoulder pain diagnosis) across 5 English-speaking regions (United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand) using the Google search engine. The top 10 websites for each term and region combination were included and combined, yielding 41 original websites for appraisal; several (6) websites were omitted as duplicates, behind paywalls, or nontext (video) for a total of 35 websites appraised. RESULTS: On average, the FRES shoulder pain websites readability was 55.37, which is categorized as "fairly difficult" to read, and a seventh- or eighth-grade reading level based on the FKGL. For trustworthiness and bias, 57% (20 of 35) of the websites were HONcode certified. The quality of health care information using the DISCERN score averaged 50.92%. Examining shoulder-specific content quality, the average SWAT score was 10.54 out of 14 possible points, with only 1 website reporting information on psychosocial aspects of shoulder pain. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that shoulder pain websites present information that is at too high of a reading level for public consumption, has a strong bias toward biomedical causes of shoulder pain, and would benefit from implementation of website screening tools to improve evidence-based content.