Search

Background: Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) has been widely used by health professionals. However, no study in Brazil has investigated the data regarding the knowledge and difficulties related to EBP from a representative sample of physical therapists. Objective: To identify behavior, knowledge, skills, resources, opinions and perceived barriers of Brazilian physical therapists from the state of São Paulo regarding EBP. Method: A customized questionnaire about behavior, knowledge, skills, resources, opinions and perceived barriers regarding EBP was sent by email to a sample of 490 physical therapists registered by the Registration Board of São Paulo, Brazil. Physical therapists who did not respond to the questionnaire were contacted by telephone and/or letter. The data were analyzed descriptively. Results: The final response rate was 64.4% (316/490). Because 60 physical therapists were no longer practicing, 256 answers were analyzed. The physical therapists reported that they routinely read scientific papers (89.5%) as a resource for professional development, followed by continuing education courses (88.3%) and books (86.3%). Approximately 35% of the respondents reported a clear understanding of the implementation of research findings in their practice; approximately 37% reported no difficulties in critically appraising scientific papers; and 67.2% strongly agreed that EBP is important for their practice. The most commonly reported barriers were related to difficulties in obtaining full-text papers (80.1%), using EBP may represent higher cost (80.1%) and the language of publication of the papers (70.3%). Conclusion: Physical therapists from São Paulo state believe that they have knowledge and skills to use EBP. Although they have favorable opinions regarding its implementation, they still encounter difficulties in implementing EBP successfully. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• We will monitor compliance with the intervention and adverse events. • Data will be analyzed following intention-to-treat principles. • A cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed. This a priori statistical analysis plan describes the methods of analysis for the Trial Of Prevention Strategies for low back pain (TOPS). TOPS aimed to investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of exercise and education classes compared with a minimal intervention control in preventing recurrence of low back pain (LBP) in people who have recently recovered from an episode of LBP. TOPS is a superiority, pragmatic, parallel-group randomized controlled trial with allocation concealment, blinded outcome assessors, and intention-to-treat analysis. Participants were randomized to a physical therapist-led exercise and education program for 12 weeks or minimal intervention. The primary outcome was days to recurrence of an episode of LBP. The three key secondary outcomes were days to recurrence of an episode of LBP resulting in (1) activity limitation, (2) care seeking for LBP; and (3) work absence of at least 1 day. Differences in survival curves for the primary (days to recurrence) and secondary outcome (days to LBP with activity limitation, days to care seeking due to LBP, and days to work absence due to LBP) will be compared using Cox regression. Hazard ratios (HRs) and median survival times with 95% confidence intervals (CI) will be calculated. The number of adverse events, including serious adverse events will be reported and the proportion of adverse events between groups will be compared using a Chi-squared test. This paper will provide a detailed description of the planned analyses for the TOPS trial. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12615000939594). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]