Premium
Use of outcome measures improved after a tailored implementation in primary care physiotherapy: a prospective, controlled study
Author(s) -
Käll Ingela,
Larsson Maria EH,
Bernhardsson Susanne
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of evaluation in clinical practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.737
H-Index - 73
eISSN - 1365-2753
pISSN - 1356-1294
DOI - 10.1111/jep.12513
Subject(s) - medicine , physical therapy , outcome (game theory) , intervention (counseling) , prospective cohort study , nursing , surgery , mathematics , mathematical economics
Rationale, aims and objectives It is important that physiotherapists routinely use outcome measures to evaluate treatment results. There is limited knowledge about effective ways to increase use of outcome measures. The objectives were to investigate the effect of a tailored implementation of guidelines for evaluation of physiotherapy treatment and to explore differences in outcome subgrouped by demographic variables. Methods A prospective, controlled study was conducted in primary care physiotherapy in western S weden. 448 publicly employed physiotherapists participated. The intervention comprised a tailored, multi‐component implementation of guidelines for treatment and evaluation of musculoskeletal disorders. The core component was a 3‐hour implementation seminar. The control group received no intervention. Self‐reported attitudes towards, access to and use of outcome measures were assessed with a web‐based questionnaire before and after the implementation. Results After the implementation, a significantly higher proportion of physiotherapists in the intervention group than in the control group reported using outcome measures frequently, 54.8% vs. 35.6%, a 19.2% difference. The proportion of physiotherapists who reported that they considered outcome measures important to use and that they had easy access to outcome measures at their workplace, were similar in both groups at follow‐up, 92.8% vs. 93.1%, and 95.2% vs. 90.8%, respectively. At follow‐up, no differences related to demographic variables were found in the subgroup analyses. Conclusions The findings suggest that a tailored, multi‐component implementation can be effective in increasing use of outcome measures. Although most physiotherapists considered outcome measures important and reported having easy access to them at their workplace, only a little more than half reported using outcome measures after the intervention.