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.

Eyes-Closed Single-Limb Balance is Not Related to Hypermobility Status in Dancers.

Hypermobility may be associated with decreased lower extremity proprioception, which in turn may increase injury risk. The prevalence of hypermobility in dancers varies across studies, but joint hypermobility appears to be more common in dancers than in the general population. The purpose of this study was to determine how hypermobility affects eyes-closed single-limb balance as an indirect measure of proprioception in dancers. The secondary aim was to compare hypermobility and balance across dancer affiliation groups. Data were collected from 45 professional dancers, 11 collegiate modern dancers, 227 student dancers, and 15 pre-professional dancers during routine dance screens. Dancer hypermobility status was assessed via an eight-point Beighton-Horan Laxity test. Single-limb balance time, in seconds, was assessed in parallel position with the eyes closed. Hypermobile (HM) and non-hypermobile (NHM) dancers showed very similar balance times (HM median: 36.5 seconds; NHM median: 33.0 seconds; p = 0.982). Hypermobility was not significantly different between dancer affiliation groups (p = 0.154): 47% in ballet academy students, 27% in collegiate modern dancers, 62% in pre-professional dancers, and 36% in professional dancers. The student, pre-professional, and professional ballet dancers all demonstrated longer balance times than the collegiate modern dancers; however, this difference was only significant between the professional ballet dancers and collegiate modern dancers (p = 0.026). Dancers demonstrated a higher prevalence of hypermobility than what has been reported for the general population. Joint hypermobility did not affect eyes-closed single-limb balance time. Future studies are needed to determine if joint hypermobility affects more sensitive measures of proprioception and risk of injury.

Examining Standing Turnout with Two Measurement Methods During Dance Wellness Screening.

This study describes trends in mean standing functional turnout angles measured on a floor protractor (FP) and the Functional Footprint(®) rotational instrument (RI) during routine clinical screens. Twenty-three professional ballet dancers, 26 collegiate modern students, and 46 ballet academy dancers participated in the study. All dancers demonstrated greater total turnout on the FP compared to the RI (p < 0.001), and the collegiate dancers had significantly smaller total turnout angles compared to both of the other groups (p < 0.001). A significant interaction between measurement method and training group (p = 0.047) on lower extremity asymmetry indicated that only in professionals left turnout angle was greater than right turnout angle on the RI (4.30° ± 6.64°) but not on the FP (0.17° ± 4.57°). It is concluded that turnout can be measured using either the FP or the RI measurement method, with recognition that FP measurements will be an average of 10° greater than those on the RI. Lower extremity asymmetries in turnout angles may be better detected on the RI than the FP.