Search

Objective: To establish the intra- and inter-rater reliability of composite finger flexion (CFF), and to compare this with goniometry. Design: Fifty-one physiotherapists and occupational therapists took part in the study. The hand of a normal subject was splinted in three different positions. Using a goniometer and a ruler alternately, each therapist measured both the proximal interphalangeal joint and CFF of three digits, following a standardized protocol. This process was repeated three times. Setting: Eighteen NHS hospital sites in the UK. Results: The two measurement methods produced different ranges and standard deviations for each digit. The repeatability coefficient shows that repeated intra-rater goniometric measures fall within 4-5 degrees of each other 95% of the time. Inter-rater goniometric measures fall within 7-9 degrees. Repeated intra-rater CFF measures fall within 5-6 mm of each other, whereas inter-rater fall within 7-9 mm. The influence of occupation, experience in hand therapy, years of practice and routine use were found to have no effect on reliability. Scaling of the two methods of measurement allowed comparison between them to be made. CFF and goniometry are equally reliable when comparing inter-rater reliability, but goniometry displays less variability than composite finger flexion for intra-rater measurements. Conclusion: In this study involving a subject with normal joints, goniometry is more reliable than CFF when only one measurer is involved. However, CFF may be a useful alternative where multiple joint measures are required, or when goniometry is impracticable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Extending the role of allied health professionals has been promoted as a key component of developing a flexible health workforce. This review aimed to synthesize the evidence about the impact of these roles. Methods: A systematic review of extended scope of practice in five groups: paramedics, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, radiographers, and speech and language therapists. The nature and effect of these roles on patients, health professionals and health services were examined. An inclusive approach to searching was used to maximize potential sources of interest including multiple databases, 'grey' literature and subject area experts. An expanded Cochrane Collaboration method was used in view of the anticipated lack of randomized controlled trials and heterogeneity of designs. Papers were only excluded after the search stage for lack of relevance. Results: A total of 355 papers was identified as meeting relevance criteria and 21 studies progressed to full review and data extraction. The primary reason for exclusion from data extraction was that the study included neither qualitative nor quantitative data or because methodological flaws compromised data quality. It was not possible to evaluate any pooled effects as patient health outcomes were rarely considered. Conclusions: A range of extended practice roles for allied health professionals have been promoted and are being undertaken, but their health outcomes have rarely been evaluated. There is also little evidence as to how best to introduce such roles, or how best to educate, support and mentor these practitioners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]