Telehealth e-mentoring in postgraduate musculoskeletal physiotherapy education: A mixed methods case study.

BACKGROUND: Educational standards of advanced musculoskeletal physiotherapy include mentored clinical practice. Whilst traditionally delivered face-to-face, telehealth e-mentoring affords a distinctive andragogy to facilitate mentee development. OBJECTIVE: To understand the experiences and outcomes of stakeholders participating in musculoskeletal physiotherapy telehealth e-mentoring. DESIGN: A case study design with sequential mixed methods (quantitative patient outcome data and qualitative interviews and a focus group) of a 20-week e-mentored telehealth physiotherapy service. METHODS: Data collection comprised 1) Patient experiences and measures of musculoskeletal health 2) Mentee semi-structured interviews 3) Mentor focus group. Data analysis included descriptive statistics (median and IQR) and the Framework Method for qualitative and quantitative data respectively. An exploratory bidirectional approach supported data integration across all participants. RESULTS: Participants included patients (n = 90), mentees (n = 10) and mentors (n = 6). Patients reported improvements (>MCID) in MSK-HQ and Patient Specific Functional Scale, with high scores for Consultation and Relational Empathy and Patient Enablement Instruments. Main themes were a) social learning b) advanced professional practice c) learner experience and d) limitations of telehealth for mentees, and for mentors a) preparedness b) journey of development and c) challenges. Participant data integration resulted in 4 main themes 1) energising/positive experience 2) communications skills valued 3) perceptions of telehealth 4) upskilling required. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth e-mentoring is a valuable alternative to face-to-face mentored physiotherapy practice to support development in advanced musculoskeletal physiotherapy practice. Findings indicate that technical and professional skills are required, high levels of communication skills were valued, there is a need for reconceptualisation of musculoskeletal physiotherapeutic interventions.

Experiences of telehealth e-mentoring within postgraduate musculoskeletal physical therapy education in the UK and Canada: a protocol for parallel mixed-methods studies and cross-cultural comparison.

INTRODUCTION: Mentored clinical practice is central to demonstrating achievement of International Educational Standards in advanced musculoskeletal physical therapy. While traditionally delivered face-to-face, telehealth e-mentoring is a novel alternative to offering this unique pedagogy to facilitate mentee critical reflection, deeper learning and enhanced knowledge translation to optimise patient care. With COVID-19 resulting in widespread adoption of telehealth and access to mentors often limited by geography or cost, the potential value of telehealth e-mentoring needs investigating. To investigate the experiences and outcomes of multiple stakeholders (student mentees, mentors and patients) engaged in musculoskeletal physical therapy telehealth e-mentoring across two universities (UK and Canada). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using case study design, we will use sequential mixed methods involving qualitative and quantitative components based on existing evidence. To examine the influence of telehealth e-mentoring on health outcomes in patients with musculoskeletal complaints, we will use patient-reported outcomes for satisfaction, patient empowerment and change in musculoskeletal health. We will conduct semistructured interviews to explore the development of critical thinking, clinical reasoning, communication skills and confidence of students engaged in telehealth e-mentoring. To explore the mentor acceptability and appropriateness of telehealth e-mentoring, we will conduct a focus group in each site. Finally, we will include a focus group of participants from each site to allow a cross-cultural comparison of findings to inform international stakeholders. Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive statistics (median and IQR) to describe changes in outcome data and qualitative data will be analysed following the Framework Method. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has ethical approval from both institutions: the University of Birmingham (ERN_20-0695) and Western University (2020-116233-47832). Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated to key stakeholders in musculoskeletal physical therapy education and practice.

Diagnostic utility of patient history and physical examination data to detect spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis in athletes with low back pain: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In adolescent athletes, low back pain has a 1-year prevalence of 57% and causes include spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis. An accurate diagnosis enables healing, prevention of progression and return to sport. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of patient history and physical examination data to identify spondylolysis and/or spondylolisthesis in athletes. DESIGN: Systematic review was undertaken according to published guidelines, and reported in line with PRISMA. METHOD: Key databases were searched up to 13/11/15. INCLUSION CRITERIA: athletic population with LBP, patient history and/or physical examination accuracy data for spondylolysis and/or spondylolisthesis, any study design including raw data. Two reviewers independently assessed risk of bias (ROB) using QUADAS-2. A data extraction sheet was pre-designed. Pooling of data and investigation for heterogeneity enabled a qualitative synthesis of data across studies. RESULTS: Of the eight included studies, two were assessed as low ROB, one of which also had no concerns regarding applicability. Age (<20 years) demonstrated 81% sensitivity and 44% specificity and gender (male) 73% sensitivity and 57% specificity for spondylolysis. Difficulty falling asleep, waking up because of pain, pain worse with sitting and walking all have sensitivity >75% for spondylolisthesis. Step-deformity palpation demonstrated 60-88% sensitivity and 87-100% specificity for spondylolisthesis. The one-legged hyperextension test was not supported for spondylolysis (sensitivity 50-73%, specificity 0-87%). CONCLUSION: No recommendations can be made utilising patient history data. Based on one low ROB study, step deformity palpation may be useful in diagnosing spondylolisthesis. No physical tests demonstrated diagnostic utility for spondylolysis. Further research is required.