ADvAnced PhysioTherapy in MuSculosKeletal Triage: Investigating prognostic factors, healthcare utilisation and clinical outcomes (ADAPT MSK) - a cohort study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Clinical specialist physiotherapist-led musculoskeletal triage clinics were introduced nationally in Ireland in 2011 to improve patient care and reduce waiting times for secondary care orthopaedics and rheumatology. Evidence has shown them to be effective in reducing waiting lists, however there are currently no data on longitudinal patient outcomes following clinic attendance. The primary aim of this cohort study is to identify predictors of pain and function outcomes up to one year following musculoskeletal triage review. Secondary aims include measuring self-reported use of healthcare resources over the 12-month follow-up period and to explore musculoskeletal phenotypes based on established prognostic factors for musculoskeletal pain. This is a prospective cohort study. METHODS: ADvAnced PhysioTherapy in MuSculosKeletal Triage (ADAPT MSK) will recruit a cohort of 252 adults through musculoskeletal triage clinics across five secondary care sites in Ireland. The STrengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines will be adhered to for future reporting. Adults (≥ 18 years old) attending physiotherapist-led musculoskeletal triage clinics with musculoskeletal pain, who do not require surgical or consultant-led medical care will be considered for participation. Participant demographics, health literacy, healthcare utilisation, and self-report questionnaires on pain, function, musculoskeletal health, musculoskeletal risk stratification, fear of movement, and psychological distress will be obtained at baseline, with follow-ups at three, six, and 12 months. Primary outcomes are pain intensity and function. Secondary outcomes include musculoskeletal risk stratification status, musculoskeletal health, healthcare utilisation, and work-related factors. Descriptive statistics will be used to profile the participants and predictors of outcome will be assessed using multivariable linear regression. Musculoskeletal phenotypes will be explored using latent class analysis. RESULTS: Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journal publication and presentation at national and international conferences. Engagement with a public patient involvement (PPI) panel will explore dissemination strategies for public and service user engagement.

Advanced musculoskeletal physiotherapy practice: The patient journey and experience.

BACKGROUND: As many patients referred to orthopaedic and rheumatology services do not require medical or surgical interventions, advanced practice physiotherapists (APPs) have been introduced into hospital services to triage the care of these patients. Patient perspectives are critical to review the acceptance of this model of care and potential for expansion into primary care. This study aimed to explore the clinical journeys, and the experiences and perceptions of patients attending APP services. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews (n = 10) were conducted with patients across two hospital sites, with narrative data subjected to a thematic analysis. MSK journeys were mapped via medical chart and interview data, with surveys collecting demographics. RESULTS: Patient journeys involved multiple contact points and some duplication in MSK health services. Overall, experiences of the APP service were positive, with faster access into the hospital system and patients valued the interpersonal and professional skills of the APP. Having already attended a physiotherapist, some patients did have a preconception of what the APP could offer them. However, initial concerns were mitigated following the APP appointment, as the APP had extensive MSK knowledge. Hospitals remained the preferred location for MSK appointments due to availability of diagnostics and 'specialists', and close proximity of the doctor. CONCLUSION: Patients were positive about the new MSK APP service and benefits related to shorter wait times and seeing a specialist who listened and involved them in their management. However, a cultural shift regarding patient perceptions of the 'specialists' in hospitals and the role of a physiotherapist is required.

The access randomized clinical trial of public versus private physiotherapy for low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN: Pragmatic randomized clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated differences in the clinical outcomes of public physiotherapy (public PT) versus private physiotherapy (private PT) for general practitioner-referred patients with acute and chronic low back pain (LBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Health care setting (i.e., public or private) has been found to influence the course and clinical outcome of common diseases. Despite the international burden of LBP, the effect of health care setting on clinical outcomes has not been investigated in this population. METHODS: One hundred sixty consenting patients, who were referred for physiotherapy for LBP by their general practitioner, completed the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (primary outcome), Short-Form 36 v2, Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire, Back Beliefs Questionnaire, EuroQol EQ5D, and Patient Satisfaction Questionnaires. The patients were stratified (acute LBP: ≤ 3 months, n = 55; chronic LBP: > 3 months, n = 105), randomly allocated to receive public PT (n = 3 hospitals) or private PT (n = 12 clinics), and followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months postrandomization. RESULTS: Repeated measures analysis of variance showed significant improvement over time for 9 predominantly biomedical outcomes: (i) Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire at 3 and 6 months, (ii) Short-Form 36 v2 Physical Component Score, Bodily Pain, Role Physical, General Health, Vitality, EQ5D visual analogue scale, and weighted health index scores at 3 months, and (iii) the Back Beliefs Questionnaire at 6 months. The remaining 7 biopsychosocial outcomes showed no change over time, and the "between within" repeated measures analysis of variance showed no significant differences between groups over time for any outcome measures (P > 0.05). Independent samples t tests found no significant differences between groups in the mean changes in outcome measures from baseline at 12 months, apart from SF-36 v2 Role Physical (mean difference, 95% CI = 5.64 [0.860-10.428]; t = 2.337; P = 0.021) in favor of the private PT group. There were significantly higher levels of satisfaction with outcome of treatment in the private PT group (median [IQR]: public PT: 5.0 [2.0]; private PT: 6.0 [2.0]; Mann-Whitney U test = 1324.50; P = 0.020), but no differences in satisfaction with treatment or global perceived improvement (P > 0.05). The private PT group had a significantly shorter waiting time (mean difference = 39.79 days; 95% CI: 26.88-52.69; t = 6.121; P < 0.001) and treatment duration (mean difference: 23.48 days; 95% CI: 7.43-39.52; t = 2.909; P = 0.005) than public PT. Participants in both groups were treated with advice/education, manipulative therapy, and exercise therapy, with minimal use of cognitive behavioral approaches in either group. Physiotherapists in the private PT group had significantly more experience and more postgraduate qualifications than the public PT group (P < 0.005). CONCLUSION: Despite differences between public and private PT regarding waiting times for treatment and therapist experience, there were no significant differences between groups in the majority of clinical outcome measure scores at follow-up, apart from SF-36 Role Physical and satisfaction with treatment outcome in favor of the private PT group.

Patient satisfaction with private physiotherapy for musculoskeletal pain.

BACKGROUND: Despite emphasis on patient centred healthcare, healthcare professionals have been slow to use validated measurements of patient satisfaction in physiotherapy practice. The aim of this cross sectional survey was to measure patient satisfaction with private physiotherapy in Ireland, for patients with musculoskeletal pain, using a previously validated survey instrument. METHODS: A multidimensional patient satisfaction questionnaire 'PTOPS', which assesses patient satisfaction with outpatient physiotherapy treatment, was translated from American English to European English, and relevant demographic and global satisfaction items were included. This was then circulated to patients with musculoskeletal pain (n = 240) for anonymous completion and return to the research team. Data were analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, v.12). RESULTS: In total 55% (n = 131/240) of questionnaires were returned. Just over half of the respondents were male (53.4%, n = 70), with a mean age (SD) of 37.7 years (12.4), and had previous experience of physiotherapy (65.6%, n = 86). The most common site of musculoskeletal pain was spinal (51.5% n = 66). The mean (SD) number of treatments was 8.3 (8.3), at a mean total cost (SD) of 350.2 euros (322.8 euros). The 'PTOPS' questionnaire categorised and scored satisfaction items under four domains, Enhancer, Detractor, Location and Cost. The mean score (SD), optimum score, and scoring range for each domain were: 'Enhancer' 41.2 (3.8), 50, 10-50; 'Detractor' 19.4 (4.4), 10, 10-50; 'Location' 28.0 (4.1), 35, 7-35; 'Cost' 18.9 (2.8), 7, 7-35. "Overall satisfaction with physiotherapy experience" was scored on a five-point scale "excellent to poor", with a modal response of "Very Good" (42%; n = 55). CONCLUSION: This study measured patient satisfaction with private physiotherapy treatment for musculoskeletal pain in Ireland using a previously validated outcome measure and provides a template for future studies of this increasingly important topic. Results demonstrated high levels of satisfaction with all components of physiotherapy treatment, except cost, and provided valuable patient feedback regarding their physiotherapy treatment for musculoskeletal pain. Results can be used by physiotherapists to improve future patient experiences with a view to improving patient attendance and compliance with physiotherapy treatment protocols for patients with musculoskeletal pain.

Physiotherapy for low back pain: differences between public and private healthcare sectors in Ireland--a retrospective survey.

OBJECTIVES: European clinical guidelines for low back pain (LBP) recommend early referral of appropriate patients to health services such as physiotherapy. The current study aimed to investigate any differences between the physiotherapy management of LBP, and the physiotherapist and patient profiles in public and private health settings in Ireland. DESIGN: A retrospective chart survey of all LBP patients referred for physiotherapy to one Dublin City hospital and three neighbouring private practices in 2003 was conducted. RESULTS: In total, 249 physiotherapy charts (hospital [H] n=93; private practice [Pr] n=156) were identified and demographic, LBP, and management details analysed. Only charts containing full LBP duration and physiotherapy treatment data were included in the analysis of these parameters (LBP duration: H=84, Pr=130; physiotherapy treatment: H=79, Pr=155). There were significantly higher percentages of female (H=66%; Pr=50%: p=0.017), older (H=46 years; Pr=36 years: p<0.001), and chronic LBP patients (>12 weeks; H=50%; Pr=2%: p<0.001) in the public setting. Public patients had significantly longer waiting times for physiotherapy (median H=10 weeks; Pr=0; p<0.001), and more treatment (H=5.1; Pr=2.5: p0.001) than private patients. While treatment approaches were similar for both settings, there was a significantly higher use of advice and spinal stabilisation exercises in the public setting. However, there was minimal difference in the management of acute or chronic LBP in both setting suggesting poor adherence to European guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Findings showed longer waiting times, and a higher number and duration of physiotherapy treatments for acute and chronic LBP in the public setting suggesting the need to develop publicly funded primary healthcare in Ireland.