Search

Background: Many assume that outcomes from physical therapy research in one country can be generalized to other countries. However, no well designed studies comparing outcomes among countries have been conducted. In this exploratory study, our goal was to compare patient demographics and treatment processes in outpatient physical therapy practice in the United States, Israel and the Netherlands. Methods: Cross-sectional data from three different clinical databases were examined. Data were selected for patients aged 18 years and older and started an episode of outpatient therapy between January 1st 2005 and December 31st 2005. Results are based on data from approximately 63,000 patients from the United States, 100,000 from Israel and 12,000 from the Netherlands. Results: Age, gender and the body part treated were similar in the three countries. Differences existed in episode duration of the health problem, with more patients with chronic complaints treated in the United States and Israel compared to the Netherlands. In the United States and Israel, physical agents and mechanical modalities were applied more often than in the Netherlands. The mean number of visits per treatment episode, adjusted for age, gender, and episode duration, varied from 8 in Israel to 11 in the United States and the Netherlands. Conclusion: The current study showed that clinical databases can be used for comparing patient demographic characteristics and for identifying similarities and differences among countries in physical therapy practice. However, terminology used to describe treatment processes and classify patients was different among databases. More standardisation is required to enable more detailed comparisons. Nevertheless the differences found in number of treatment visits per episode imply that one has to be careful to generalize outcomes from physical therapy research from one country to another. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the use, satisfaction, needs, and preferences regarding physical therapy (PT) in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc)., Methods: A total of 405 SSc patients, treated in the Leiden University Medical Center multidisciplinary care program and fulfilling American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) 2013 SSc criteria, received a questionnaire containing 37 questions on use and satisfaction regarding PT over a 2-year period, and their needs and preferences for future PT., Results: A total of 204 SSc patients (median age 63 years, 81% female) completed the questionnaire. One hundred twenty-eight patients (63%) had used or were using PT in a primary care setting. For 39% of patients not using PT, lack of referral or lack of knowledge was the reason for not using it. The most frequently reported active treatments were muscle-strengthening (n = 92 [72%]), range of motion (n = 77 [60%]), and aerobic exercises (n = 72 [56%]). Specific SSc hand- and mouth-opening exercises were reported by 20 (15%) and 7 (6%) patients, respectively. Manual treatment (massage or passive mobilization) was reported by 83 patients (65%). The mean ± SD satisfaction score (range 0-10) was 8.2 ± 1.6. Regarding patients' needs, 96 patients (47%) of the total group wanted to receive more information concerning PT, and 128 (63%) wanted to continue, start, or restart PT in the near future, with 56 of the 128 patients (44%) favoring individual treatment on a continuous basis., Conclusion: We observed a significant variation in the use and content of PT for SSc patients in a primary care setting. Our results suggest potential underuse of PT care, in particular for hand and oral dysfunction, and underpin the need for initiatives to improve the quality and accessibility of PT care for SSc patients., (© 2021 The Authors. Arthritis Care & Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Objectives: Impaired hand function in systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a primary cause of disability and contributes diminished health-related quality of life. The objective of the present study was to evaluate sociodemographic, lifestyle, and disease-related factors independently associated with hand function in SSc., Methods: Patients enrolled in the Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network Cohort who completed baseline study questionnaires between March 2014 and September 2017 were included. Hand function was measured using the Cochin Hand Function Scale (CHFS). Multiple linear regression analysis was used to identify independent correlates of impaired hand function., Results: Among 1193 participants (88% female), the mean CHFS score was 13.3 (SD=16.1). Female sex (standardised regression coefficient, beta (β)=.05), current smoking (β=.07), higher BMI (β=.06), diffuse SSc (β=0.14), more severe Raynaud's scores (β=.23), more severe finger ulcer scores (β=.23), moderate (β=0.19) or severe small joint contractures (β=.20), rheumatoid arthritis (β=0.07), and idiopathic inflammatory myositis (β=0.06) were significantly associated with higher CHFS scores (more impaired hand function). Consumption of 1-7 alcoholic drinks per week (β=-0.07) was associated with lower CHFS scores (less impaired hand function) compared to no drinking., Conclusions: Multiple factors are associated with hand function in SSc. The presence of moderate or severe small joint contractures, the presence of digital ulcers, and severity of Raynaud's phenomenon had the largest associations. Effective interventions are needed to improve the management of hand function in patients with SSc.

Objectives: Increasingly, medical research involves patients who complete outcomes in different languages. This occurs in countries with more than one common language, such as Canada (French/English) or the United States (Spanish/English), as well as in international multi-centre collaborations, which are utilized frequently in rare diseases such as systemic sclerosis (SSc). In order to pool or compare outcomes, instruments should be measurement equivalent (invariant) across cultural or linguistic groups. This study provides an example of how to assess cross-language measurement equivalence by comparing the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale between English-speaking Canadian and Dutch SSc patients., Methods: The CES-D was completed by 922 English-speaking Canadian and 213 Dutch SSc patients. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to assess the factor structure in both samples. The Multiple-Indicator Multiple-Cause (MIMIC) model was utilized to assess the amount of differential item functioning (DIF)., Results: A two-factor model (positive and negative affect) showed excellent fit in both samples. Statistically significant, but small-magnitude, DIF was found for 3 of 20 items on the CES-D. The English-speaking Canadian sample endorsed more feeling-related symptoms, whereas the Dutch sample endorsed more somatic/retarded activity symptoms. The overall estimate in depression scores between English and Dutch was not influenced substantively by DIF., Conclusions: CES-D scores from English-speaking Canadian and Dutch SSc patients can be compared and pooled without concern that measurement differences may substantively influence results. The importance of assessing cross-language measurement equivalence in rheumatology studies prior to pooling outcomes obtained in different languages should be emphasized.