Search

Objective The purpose of this study was to describe physical therapists’ attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors regarding the use of diagnostic imaging. Methods Physical therapists in the United States were recruited from July 2018 through May 2019 to complete a web-based, cross-sectional survey. Participants were asked about demographics, their perceived knowledge base and skills for recommending or ordering different imaging modalities, and their behaviors regarding diagnostic imaging. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the participants’ demographics and responses to all questions. Chi-square tests were performed to compare responses by characteristics of survey participants and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to compare levels of agreement. Results The mean age was 43 years, and of the 739 respondents, 58% (n = 417) were female. Ninety-two percent of respondents (n = 595) reported having recommended diagnostic imaging to another provider at least once. Only 11.6% (n = 75) reported having ever directly ordered diagnostic imaging. Participants’ attitudes about their knowledge base and skills for recommending or ordering plain radiographs were stronger compared with any other imaging modalities followed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) over other imaging techniques. Participants’ attitudes on recommending plain radiographs or MRI differed by professional education level, board-certification status, fellowship completion, and years since graduation. Conclusion It is common for physical therapists to recommend imaging, but few have directly ordered imaging. Most survey participants believed that they have an adequate knowledge base and skills for recommending and ordering plain radiographs and MRI. Impact These results can serve as a benchmark for future comparison as policies and educations evolve. Understanding physical therapists’ attitudes, knowledge, and use of diagnostic imaging is important to inform research, policy, and education.

The concept of value is receiving greater attention in rehabilitation and the broader health care environment. The overall purpose of this article is to present a framework to help clinicians, researchers, educators, and policy makers better understand the role of health services research in developing and evaluating evidence on value in rehabilitation. Value in health care is a multidimensional concept and may be defined differently by various stakeholders, but assessing value typically involves considering a combination of several health and economic outcomes. However, health care stakeholders often lack sufficient information on these outcomes to make well-informed decisions. Health services approaches such as comparative effectiveness research, patient-centered outcomes research, and health economics assessments are some ways to evaluate value. The evidence generated from such studies directly informs decision making and health policy. Rehabilitation professionals have a great opportunity to increase their engagement in describing, evaluating, delivering, and disseminating high-value care, but there are several barriers they need to consider to be most successful. Embracing health services research best practices is essential for advancing appropriate rehabilitation practice, research, and policy and for addressing challenges to implementing high-value care.

Background Among older adults, it is not clear how different types or amounts of physical therapy may be associated with improvements in back pain and function. Objective The study objective was to investigate the association between types or amounts of physical therapist services and 1-year outcomes among older adults with back pain. Design This was a prospective cohort study. Methods A total of 3,771 older adults who were enrolled in a cohort study and who had a new primary care visit for back pain participated. Physical therapy use was ascertained from electronic health records. The following patient-reported outcomes were collected over 12 months: back-related disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire) and back and leg pain intensity (11-point numerical rating scale). Marginal structural models were used to estimate average effects of different amounts of physical therapy use on disability and pain for all types of physical therapy and for active, passive, and manual physical therapy. Results A total of 1,285 participants (34.1%) received some physical therapy. There was no statistically significant gradient in relationships between physical therapy use and back-related disability score. The use of passive or manual therapy was not consistently associated with pain outcomes. Higher amounts of active physical therapy were associated with decreased back and leg pain and increased odds of clinically meaningful improvements in back and leg pain relative to results obtained with no active physical therapy. Limitations The fact that few participants had high amounts of physical therapy use limited precision and the ability to test for nonlinear relationships for the amount of use. Conclusions Higher amounts of active physical therapy were most consistently related to the greatest improvements in pain intensity; however, as with all observational studies, the results must be interpreted with caution.

Background and PurposeThe World Health Organization's Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (WHO-ICF) model was developed to describe, classify, and measure function in health care practice and research. Recently, this model has been promoted as a successor to the Nagi model by some authors in the physical therapy literature. However, conceptual work in demonstrating use of the WHO-ICF model in physical therapist management of individual patients remains sparse. The purpose of this case report series is to demonstrate the application of the WHO-ICF model in clinical reasoning and physical therapist management of acute and chronic low back pain.Case DescriptionTwo patients, 1 with acute low back pain and 1 with chronic low back pain, were treated pragmatically using the WHO-ICF model and other applicable models of clinical reasoning.InterventionManual therapy, exercise, and education interventions were directed toward relevant body structure and function impairments, activity limitations, and contextual factors based on their hypothesized contribution to functioning and disability.OutcomeBoth patients demonstrated clinically significant improvements in measures of pain, disability, and psychosocial factors after 3 weeks and 10 weeks of intervention, respectively.DiscussionThe WHO-ICF model appears to provide an effective framework for physical therapists to better understand each person's experience with his or her disablement and assists in prioritizing treatment selection. The explicit acknowledgment of personal and environmental factors aids in addressing potential barriers. The WHO-ICF model integrates well with other models of practice such as Sackett's principles of evidence-based practice, the rehabilitation cycle, and Edwards and colleagues’ clinical reasoning model. Future research should examine outcomes associated with the use of the WHO-ICF model using adequately designed clinical trials.