Physiotherapeutic interventions in multiple sclerosis across Europe: Regions and other factors that matter.

BACKGROUND: A wide variety of interventions exists in physical therapy (PT), but knowledge about their use across different geographical regions is limited. This study investigated the use of PT interventions in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) across Europe. It aimed to determine whether regions differ in applying interventions, and explore whether factors other than regions play a role in their use. METHODS: In an online cross-sectional survey, 212 respondents from 115 European workplaces providing PT services to people with MS representing 26 countries (four European regions) participated. Cluster analysis, Pearson Chi-squared test and a Poisson regression model were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Thirteen of 45 listed PT interventions were used by more than 75% of centers, while nine interventions were used by less than 25%. For 12 interventions, regions differed markedly in their use. Cluster analysis of centers identified four clusters similar in their intervention use. Cluster assignment did not fully align with regions. While center region was important, center size, number and gender of physical therapists working in the center, and time since qualification also played a role. Cluster analysis exploring the use of the interventions provided the basis for a categorization of PT interventions in line with their primary focus: 1. Physical activity (fitness/endurance/resistance) training; 2. Neuroproprioceptive "facilitation/inhibition"; 3. Motor/skill acquisition (individualized therapy led); 4. Technology based interventions. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this is the first study that has explored this topic in MS. The results broaden our understanding of the different PT interventions used in MS, as well as the context of their use.

Checking Equity: Why Differential Item Functioning Analysis Should Be a Routine Part of Developing Conceptual Assessments.

We provide a tutorial on differential item functioning (DIF) analysis, an analytic method useful for identifying potentially biased items in assessments. After explaining a number of methodological approaches, we test for gender bias in two scenarios that demonstrate why DIF analysis is crucial for developing assessments, particularly because simply comparing two groups' total scores can lead to incorrect conclusions about test fairness. First, a significant difference between groups on total scores can exist even when items are not biased, as we illustrate with data collected during the validation of the Homeostasis Concept Inventory. Second, item bias can exist even when the two groups have exactly the same distribution of total scores, as we illustrate with a simulated data set. We also present a brief overview of how DIF analysis has been used in the biology education literature to illustrate the way DIF items need to be reevaluated by content experts to determine whether they should be revised or removed from the assessment. Finally, we conclude by arguing that DIF analysis should be used routinely to evaluate items in developing conceptual assessments. These steps will ensure more equitable-and therefore more valid-scores from conceptual assessments.