Implementing good life with osteoArthritis from Denmark (GLA:D®) in Australian public hospitals. Part 2: Service providers' perceptions.

BACKGROUND: Previous literature has reported the successful implementation of the Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D®) program into predominantly private practice settings. There may be unique challenges present within the public hospital setting that influence GLA:D® implementation in public health. OBJECTIVE: Explore the attitudes and experiences of service providers directly involved in implementing GLA:D® in Australian public tertiary hospitals. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive study design. METHOD: Service providers (n = 14) from three participating hospitals took part in semi-structured focus groups at the completion of the 6-month implementation period. Inductive thematic analysis was employed to identify primary domains across all facilities. RESULTS: Four broad domains were identified. Factors that influenced uptake included GLA:D® being a recognisable, evidence-based product requiring minimal development or adaptation. The fidelity of the GLA:D® Australia program was challenged by referral of patients with multiple/complex medical comorbidities, and patient preference to complete registry data via paper rather than online. Several operational considerations are required when delivering GLA:D® in a public hospital setting, including adequate numbers of GLA:D®-trained staff, additional screening requirements, obtaining appropriate clinical space, and persisting patient barriers to attending the service. GLA:D® provided benefits beyond improvement in pain and function, including social interactivity, high attendance and promotion of long-term self-management, while also maximising service efficiencies. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing GLA:D® in Australian public hospitals was supported by service providers. Specific operational and administrative factors, including staff training, patient complexity, and registry requirements should be considered when attempting to embed and sustain GLA:D® in large Australian public tertiary hospitals.

Implementing good life with osteoArthritis from Denmark (GLA:D®) in australian public hospitals. Part 1: Feasibility.

BACKGROUND: Literature reporting positive outcomes from the Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D®) program in Australia mainly involves patients attending private physiotherapy services. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the feasibility of implementing GLA:D® in Australian public hospitals. DESIGN: Implementation study in three metropolitan tertiary public hospitals over six months. METHOD: Patients aged ≥18 years with knee or hip joint-related problems deemed appropriate for non-surgical care were invited to participate in GLA:D®. Feasibility was evaluated using RE-AIM framework components (Implementation, Effectiveness, Maintenance) using service-level metrics, patient-level data, and program fidelity assessment. Findings of qualitative interviews with service providers are presented in Part 2. RESULTS: Implementation: 70 patients (69 with knee osteoarthritis) participated (13 cohorts). 55 (79%) patients attended both education sessions, and 49 patients (70%) attended 10-12 exercises sessions. Fidelity was met based on environmental, therapist, participant- and program-related criteria. EFFECTIVENESS: At 3 months, patients reported lower average pain (visual analogue scale [0-100 mm]: effect size -0.56, 95% CI -0.88 to -0.23) and disability (HOOS/KOOS-12 [100-0]: 0.67, 0.28 to 1.05), and improved quality of life (EQ-5D overall score: 0.46, 0.11 to 0.80). No adverse events were reported. All patients who completed 3-month assessment (n = 52) would recommend GLA:D®. Maintenance: All participating services elected to continue delivering GLA:D® beyond the study. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing GLA:D® in Australian public hospitals is feasible, safe, and acceptable to patients with knee osteoarthritis. Public hospital patients with knee osteoarthritis reported improvements in pain, disability, and quality of life similar to previous GLA:D® cohorts.

Does telerehabilitation result in inferior clinical outcomes compared with in-person care for the management of chronic musculoskeletal spinal conditions in the tertiary hospital setting? A non-randomised pilot clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical guidelines recommend multidisciplinary non-surgical management for most musculoskeletal spinal conditions. Access to such services continues to be a barrier for many individuals residing outside metropolitan regions. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether clinical outcomes achieved via telerehabilitation are as good as those achieved via in-person care. METHODS: A non-randomised pilot clinical trial was undertaken where eligible patients chose to access treatment either via telerehabilitation or in-person (control group). Outcome measures for pain-related disability, pain severity and health-related quality of life were recorded at baseline, 3-, 6- and 9-months. Secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction and technical disruptions. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were recruited (telerehabilitation, n = 51; control group, n = 20). Patient characteristics did not differ at baseline and clinically meaningful improvements for pain-related disability and health-related quality of life were observed in both groups. Non-inferiority of telerehabilitation could not be claimed for any clinical outcome measure. There were no significant group-by-time interactions observed for either pain-related disability (p = 0.706), pain severity (p = 0.187) or health-related quality of life (p = 0.425) measures. The telerehabilitation group reported significantly higher levels of treatment satisfaction (median: 97 vs. 76.5; p = 0.021); 7.9% of telerehabilitation appointments were not completed due to technical disruptions. DISCUSSION: Findings indicate patients with chronic musculoskeletal spinal conditions can achieve clinically meaningful improvements in their condition when accessing care via telerehabilitation. Telerehabilitation should be considered for individuals unable to access relevant in-person services; however non-inferiority remains inconclusive and requires further exploration.

Telehealth for musculoskeletal physiotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Musculoskeletal conditions are a leading cause of global morbidity. Access to traditional in-person healthcare can be difficult for some under usual conditions and has become a ubiquitous barrier throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Telehealth, defined as the 'delivery of healthcare at a distance using information and communication technology' is a solution to many access barriers and has been rapidly adopted by many healthcare professions throughout the crisis. While significant advancements in technology has made the widespread adoption of telehealth feasible, there are many factors to be considered when implementing a telehealth service. PURPOSE: The aims of this masterclass are to (i) introduce telehealth and outline the current research within the context of musculoskeletal physiotherapy; (ii) provide insights into some of the broader challenges in the wide-scale adoption of telehealth; and (iii) to describe a systematic approach to implementing telehealth into existing healthcare settings, along with some practical considerations. IMPLICATIONS: Telehealth is a broad concept and should be implemented to meet the specific needs of a healthcare service. This masterclass offers a structured approach to the implementation of a musculoskeletal physiotherapy telehealth service, and highlights practical considerations required by both clinicians and healthcare organisations throughout all stages of the implementation process.

Clinicians' Perspectives of a Novel Home-Based Multidisciplinary Telehealth Service for Patients with Chronic Spinal Pain.

Chronic spinal pain conditions can often be successfully managed by a non-surgical, multidisciplinary approach, however many individuals are unable to access such specialised services within their local community. A possible solution may be the delivery of care via telerehabilitation. This study aimed to evaluate clinicians' perspectives on providing clinical care via telerehabilitation during the early implementation of a novel spinal telerehabilitation service. Eight clinicians' were recruited, completing surveys at four separate time points. Confidence in providing treatment via telerehabilitation significantly improved with time (χ2(3)=16.22, p=0.001). Clinicians became significantly more accepting of telerehabilitation being a time- (χ2(3)=11.237, p=0.011), and cost-effective (χ2(3)=9.466, p=0.024) platform in which they could deliver care. Overall satisfaction was high, with technology becoming easier to use (p=0.026) and ability to establish rapport significantly improved with experience (p=0.043). Understanding clinicians' perspectives throughout the early implementation phase of a new telerehabilitation service is a critical component in determining long-term sustainability.

Agreement between telehealth and in-person assessment of patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions presenting to an advanced-practice physiotherapy screening clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the level of agreement between a telehealth and in-person assessment of a representative sample of patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions referred to an advanced-practice physiotherapy screening clinic. DESIGN: Repeated-measures study design. PARTICIPANTS: 42 patients referred to the Neurosurgical & Orthopaedic Physiotherapy Screening Clinic (Queensland, Australia) for assessment of their chronic lumbar spine, knee or shoulder condition. INTERVENTION: Participants underwent two consecutive assessments by different physiotherapists within a single clinic session. In-person assessments were conducted as per standard clinical practice. Telehealth assessments took place remotely via videoconferencing. Six Musculoskeletal Physiotherapists were paired together to perform both assessment types. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical management decisions including (i) recommended management pathways, (ii) referral to allied health professions, (iii) clinical diagnostics, and (iv) requirement for further investigations were compared using reliability and agreement statistics. RESULTS: There was substantial agreement (83.3%; 35/42 cases) between in-person and telehealth assessments for recommended management pathways. Moderate to near perfect agreement (AC1 = 0.58-0.9) was reached for referral to individual allied health professionals. Diagnostic agreement was 83.3% between the two delivery mediums, whilst there was substantial agreement (81%; AC1 = 0.74) when requesting further investigations. Overall, participants were satisfied with the telehealth assessment. CONCLUSION: There is a high level of agreement between telehealth and in-person assessments with respect to clinical management decisions and diagnosis of patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions managed in an advanced-practice physiotherapy screening clinic. Telehealth can be considered as a viable and effective medium to assess those patients who are unable to attend these services in person.

Sensorimotor and Physiological Indicators of Impairment in Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature with meta-analysis to determine whether persistence of sensorimotor or physiological impairment exists between 4 weeks to 6 months post mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), and assign level of evidence to findings. METHOD: The databases PubMed, pscyINFO, SPORTdiscus, Medline, CINAHL and Embase were searched from inception to November 2016 using a priori inclusion criteria. Critical appraisal was performed, and an evidence matrix established level of evidence. Meta-analysis of pooled results identified standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) between mTBI and healthy controls for a variety of physiological and sensorimotor indicators. RESULTS: Eighteen eligible articles, with a mean quality score of 15.67 (SD = 2.33) were included in the final review. Meta-analysis of center of motion variable; maximal mediolateral center of motion/center of pressure separation distance SMD [95% CI] approached significance at (-0.42 [-0.84, -0.00], I2 = 0%) for dual task, level walking indicating a potential reduction in maximal mediolateral excursion during gait in the mTBI group compared to healthy controls. Significantly reduced variability in the standard deviation of heart beat intervals was observed in the mTBI group (-0.51 [-0.74, -0.28], I2 = 0%). Overall, significant group differences in 36 sensorimotor and physiological variables (eg, balance, gait velocity and motion analysis outcomes, various oculomotor tasks, as well as heart rate variability frequency domains) were identified. CONCLUSION: Findings demonstrate that persistence of sensorimotor and physiological changes beyond expected recovery times following subacute mTBI in an adult population is possible. These findings have implications for post-injury assessment and management.

Patients are willing to use telehealth for the multidisciplinary management of chronic musculoskeletal conditions: A cross-sectional survey.

Introduction Access to specialised multidisciplinary healthcare services is difficult for many patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions. A possible solution could be delivery of care via telehealth. This study aims to identify current barriers in accessing healthcare services, and to determine if telehealth is an acceptable mode of healthcare delivery, from the perspective of patients with chronic musculoskeletal conditions. Methods Surveys were distributed to current patients receiving care within the Neurosurgical and Orthopaedic Physiotherapy Screening Clinic and Multidisciplinary Service (N/OPSC & MDS) at six facilities throughout Queensland, Australia. The 48-item survey evaluated five key areas including demographics; current barriers to attendance; satisfaction with current management provided by the N/OPSC & MDS; technology access and literacy; and attitudes and preference towards telehealth. Results In total, 85 patients (71%) completed the survey. The majority of patients were satisfied overall with the N/OPSC & MDS, but almost one-quarter of the patients reported ceasing treatment due to difficulty accessing services. Over half of the respondents were willing to use telehealth if it reduced the costs (53%) and time (57%) associated with attending appointments. Patients in paid employment were more likely (65%) to use telehealth if it reduced work absenteeism. Overall, 78% of patients were identified as having appropriate technology access to enable home telehealth. Specifically, 43% of patients would prefer home telehealth over having to travel to attend their appointments. Discussion The majority of N/OPSC & MDS patients are willing to engage in telehealth for the management of their chronic musculoskeletal condition. These findings justify consideration of telehealth as an additional method of service delivery within the existing N/OPSC & MD service.

Service provider perceptions of telerehabilitation as an additional service delivery option within an Australian neurosurgical and orthopaedic physiotherapy screening clinic: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The Neurosurgical & Orthopaedic Physiotherapy Screening Clinic and Multidisciplinary Service (N/OPSC&MDS) originated as a complementary, non-surgical pathway for patients referred to public neurosurgical and orthopaedic specialist services. Patient access to the N/OPSC&MDS could potentially be improved with the implementation of telerehabilitation as an additional method of service delivery. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate service provider's views on (1) current barriers to patients' accessing N/OPSC & MD services, and (2) the implementation of telerehabilitation within the N/OPSC&MDS. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive study design. METHODS: Healthcare providers (n = 26) were recruited from six N/OPSC&MD services located throughout Queensland, Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore service providers' views with respect to existing barriers to patients accessing the N/OPSC&MDS, and if telerehabilitation could be feasibly adopted to address current barriers. RESULTS: Template analysis resulted in six themes: (1) barriers to some patients' accessing current N/OPSC&MD services are complex & multifaceted; (2) telerehabilitation could improve patient access to appropriate management for their musculoskeletal condition; (3) telerehabilitation may have limitations when compared to face-to-face healthcare; (4) the delivery of telerehabilitation needs to be flexible; (5) perceived barriers, and (6) facilitators to the successful implementation of telerehabilitation within the N/OPSC&MDS. CONCLUSION: This study represents a critical step in determining the readiness of service providers for the implementation of telerehabilitation within the N/OPSC&MDS. Although cautious, service providers are overall accepting of the implementation of telerehabilitation, acknowledging that it could eliminate several current barriers, subsequently achieving more equitable access to the service.

Real-time telerehabilitation for the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions is effective and comparable to standard practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment delivered via real-time telerehabilitation for the management of musculoskeletal conditions, and to determine if real-time telerehabilitation is comparable to conventional methods of delivery within this population. DATA SOURCES: Six databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PEDro, psycINFO, CINAHL) were searched from inception to November 2015 for literature which reported on the outcomes of real-time telerehabilitation for musculoskeletal conditions. REVIEW METHODS: Two reviewers screened 5913 abstracts where 13 studies ( n = 1520) met the eligibility criteria. Methodological quality was assessed using the Downs & Black 'Checklist for Measuring Quality' tool. Results were pooled for meta-analysis based upon primary outcome measures and reported as standardised mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Aggregate results suggest that telerehabilitation is effective in the improvement of physical function (SMD 1.63, 95%CI 0.92-2.33, I2=93%), whilst being slightly more favourable (SMD 0.44, 95%CI 0.19-0.69, I2=58%) than the control cohort following intervention. Sub-group analyses reveals that telerehabilitation in addition to usual care is more favourable (SMD 0.64, 95%CI 0.43-0.85, I2=10%) than usual care alone, whilst treatment delivered solely via telerehabilitation is equivalent to face-to-face intervention (SMD MD 0.14, 95% CI -0.10-0.37, I2 = 0%) for the improvement of physical function. The improvement of pain was also seen to be comparable between cohorts (SMD 0.66, 95%CI -0.27-1.60, I2=96%) following intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time telerehabilitation appears to be effective and comparable to conventional methods of healthcare delivery for the improvement of physical function and pain in a variety of musculoskeletal conditions.