ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, hospital physiotherapy departments transitioned to telerehabilitation to ensure continuity of care for patients. The purpose of this study is to determine the key elements to successful, rapid uptake of telerehabilitation in medium-sized public hospital physiotherapy departments in response to COVID-19. METHODS: This study used a qualitative design. Physiotherapists who delivered telerehabilitation consultations during the COVID-19 restriction period in two Brisbane public hospital physiotherapy departments were eligible to participate in semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Twenty-five physiotherapists (22-60 years of age; 68% female) with 1-40 years of clinical experience provided insights into their perceptions of the rapid uptake of telerehabilitation in the provision of clinical care. Physiotherapists worked across musculoskeletal outpatient (72%), inpatient, community, paediatrics and pelvic health departments. Qualitative analyses in relation to the physiotherapist perceptions of the key elements of rapid transition to telerehabilitation, revealed four key themes underpinning success: (1) 'it requires a whole team approach', (2) 'technology issues will be encountered and can be overcome', (3) 'optimise the situation while understanding the differences' and (4) 'modifying your approach doesn't imply inferior quality of care'. CONCLUSION: Rapid implementation of telerehabilitation in a hospital setting is possible, and is facilitated by organisational, administrative and management support, willingness of physiotherapists to adopt, shared learning experience, quality software and connection, availability of equipment and space and optimised systems and processes. Key factors facilitating successful telerehabilitation consultations include effective communication, demonstration, involving a third party to help, and clients who are well prepared and willing to engage.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Non-surgical multidisciplinary management is often the first pathway of care for patients with chronic low back pain (LBP). This study explores if patient characteristics recorded at the initial service examination have an association with a poor response to this pathway of care in an advanced practice physiotherapist-led tertiary service. METHODS: Two hundred and forty nine patients undergoing non-surgical multidisciplinary management for their LBP across 8 tertiary public hospitals in Queensland, Australia participated in this prospective longitudinal study. Generalised linear models (logistic family) examined the relationship between patient characteristics and a poor response at 6 months follow-up using a Global Rating of Change measure. RESULTS: Overall 79 of the 178 (44%) patients completing the Global Rating of Change measure (28.5% loss to follow-up) reported a poor outcome. Patient characteristics retained in the final model associated with a poor response included lower Formal Education Level (ie did not complete school) (Odds Ratio (OR (95% confidence interval)) (2.67 (1.17-6.09), p = 0.02) and higher self-reported back disability (measured with the Oswestry Disability Index) (OR 1.33 (1.01-1.77) per 10/100 point score increase, p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: A low level of formal education and high level of self-reported back disability may be associated with a poor response to non-surgical multidisciplinary management of LBP in tertiary care. Patients with these characteristics may need greater assistance with regard to their comprehension of health information, and judicious monitoring of their response to facilitate timely alternative care if no benefits are attained.