Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Adults and Adolescents With Patellofemoral Pain: A Systematic Review of Construct Validity, Reliability, Responsiveness, and Interpretability Using the COSMIN Methodology.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to appraise the construct validity, reliability, responsiveness, and interpretability of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to assess function and pain in adults and adolescents with patellofemoral pain (PFP). DESIGN: Systematic review of measurement properties LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched the PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to January 6, 2022. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that assessed the measurement properties of English-language PROMs for PFP and their cultural adaptations and translations. DATA SYNTHESIS: Using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology, we determined overall ratings and quality of evidence for construct validity, internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, and responsiveness. We extracted data related to interpretability for clinical use. RESULTS: After screening 7066 titles, 61 studies for 33 PROMs were included. Only 2 PROMs had evidence of "sufficient" or "indeterminate" quality for all measurement properties. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score patellofemoral subscale (KOOS-PF) had "low" to "high" quality evidence for a rating of "sufficient" for 4 measurement properties. The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) had very low-quality evidence for a "sufficient" rating for 4 measurement properties. The KOOS-PF and LEFS were rated "indeterminate" for structural validity and internal consistency. The KOOS-PF had the best interpretability with reported minimal important change and 0% ceiling and floor effects. No studies examined cross-cultural validity. CONCLUSION: The KOOS-PF and LEFS had the strongest measurement properties among PROMs used for PFP. More research is needed, particularly regarding structural validity and interpretability of PROMs. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(8):1-20. Epub: 20 June 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11730.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Adults and Adolescents with Patellofemoral Pain: A Systematic Review of Content Validity and Feasibility Using the COSMIN Methodology.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the content validity and feasibility of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to assess pain and function in adults and adolescents with patellofemoral pain (PFP). DESIGN: Systematic review. LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched the databases PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and the Cochrane Library from inception to January 6, 2022. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that described the development or evaluation of the content validity of English-language PROMs for PFP, as well as their translations and cultural adaptations to different languages. DATA SYNTHESIS: Using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology, we determined overall ratings and quality of evidence for the relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of PROMs. We extracted data related to feasibility for clinical use (eg, administration time and scoring ease). RESULTS: Forty-three studies for 33 PROMs were included. The overall quality of most studies was "inadequate" due to failure to engage stakeholders and/or ensure adherence to rigorous qualitative research procedures. Of all PROMs evaluated, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Patellofemoral subscale (KOOS-PF), was the only PROM with sufficient content validity components. Quality of evidence for content validity of the KOOS-PF was low. Most PROMs were rated feasible for clinical and research purposes. CONCLUSION: Most PROMs used to measure pain and function in patients with PFP have inadequate content validity. The KOOS-PF had the highest overall content validity. We recommend the KOOS-PF for evaluating pain and function (in research and clinical practice) in adults and adolescents with PFP. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(1):23-39. Epub: 18 October 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.11317.

Patterns of Clinical Reasoning in Physical Therapist Students.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Clinical reasoning is a complex, nonlinear problem-solving process that is influenced by models of practice. The development of physical therapists' clinical reasoning abilities is a crucial yet underresearched aspect of entry-level (professional) physical therapist education. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the types of clinical reasoning strategies physical therapist students engage in during a patient encounter. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive case study design involving within and across case analysis was used. Eight second-year, professional physical therapist students from 2 different programs completed an evaluation and initial intervention for a standardized patient followed by a retrospective think-aloud interview to explicate their reasoning processes. Participants' clinical reasoning strategies were examined using a 2-stage qualitative method of thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants demonstrated consistent signs of development of physical therapy-specific reasoning processes, yet varied in their approach to the case and use of reflection. Participants who gave greater attention to patient education and empowerment also demonstrated greater use of reflection-in-action during the patient encounter. One negative case illustrates the variability in the rate at which students may develop these abilities. CONCLUSIONS: Participants demonstrated development toward physical therapist--specific clinical reasoning, yet demonstrated qualitatively different approaches to the patient encounter. Multiple factors, including the use of reflection-in-action, may enable students to develop greater flexibility in their reasoning processes.

Factors that influence the clinical decision making of novice and experienced physical therapists.

BACKGROUND: The depth and breadth of prior experience informs clinical decision making in novice and experienced physical therapist clinicians. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this research were to identify differences in clinical decision-making abilities and processes between novice and experienced physical therapist clinicians and to develop a model of the factors that influence clinical decision making. DESIGN: Qualitative research methods and grounded theory were used to gain insight into the factors and experiences that inform clinical decision making. METHODS: Three participant pairs (each pair consisted of 1 novice physical therapist and 1 experienced physical therapist) were purposively selected from 3 inpatient rehabilitation settings. Case summaries from each participant provided the basis for within- and across-case analyses. The credibility of the results was established through checking of the case summaries by the participants, presentation of low-inference data, and triangulation across multiple data sources and within and across participant groups. RESULTS: The factors that influenced clinical decision making were categorized as informative or directive. Novice participants relied more on informative factors, whereas experienced participants were more likely to rely on directive factors. An intermediate effect beyond novice practice was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study may be used by educators and employers to develop and structure learning experiences and mentoring opportunities for students and novice learners with the aim of facilitating the development of skills and abilities consistent with expert clinical decision making.

Novice and experienced physical therapist clinicians: a comparison of how reflection is used to inform the clinical decision-making process.

BACKGROUND: Prior experience informs clinical decision making and shapes how reflection is used by novice and experienced physical therapist clinicians. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this research were: (1) to determine the types and extent of reflection that informs the clinical decision-making process and (2) to compare the use of reflection to direct and assess clinical decisions made by novice and experienced physical therapists. DESIGN: Qualitative research methods using grounded theory were used to gain insight into how physical therapists use reflection to inform clinical decision making. METHODS: Three participant pairs (each pair consisting of one novice and one experienced physical therapist) were purposively selected from 3 inpatient rehabilitation settings. Case summaries of each participant provided the basis for within- and across-case analysis. Credibility of these results was established through member check of the case summaries, presentation of low-inference data, and triangulation across multiple data sources and within and across the participant groups. RESULTS: Although all participants engaged in reflection-on-action, the experienced participants did so with greater frequency. The experienced participants were distinguished by their use of reflection-in-action and self-assessment during therapist-patient interactions. An intermediate effect beyond novice practice was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study may be used by educators and employers to develop and structure learning experiences and mentoring opportunities to facilitate clinical decision-making abilities and the development of the skills necessary for reflection in students and novice practitioners.

Factors that influence the clinical decision-making of rehabilitation professionals in long-term care settings.

The purpose of this qualitative research was to evaluate the reasoning of clinicians practicing in long-term care facilities and to explore factors influencing their professional development. Eighteen participants were recruited from eight clinical sites and included seven occupational therapists, eight physical therapists, and three speech therapists distributed across three groups relative to experience. Nonparticipant observation and videotape of therapist-patient interactions were used in semi-structured interviews with each participant. Qualitative data analysis software was used during a process of open and axial coding, followed by thematic analysis. The facilitory and inhibitory factors that affect clinical reasoning and professional development were identified. Rehabilitation professionals in long-term care demonstrated clinical reasoning within the context of patient-centered goals. Well-developed and explicit programs for mentorship, professional development, and continuing education fostered their clinical reasoning abilities. Participants perceived that these factors were vital to achieving optimal patient outcomes.