Strategies to prevent long-term opioid use following trauma: a Canadian practice survey.

PURPOSE: To evaluate how Canadian clinicians involved in trauma patient care and prescribing opioids perceive the use and effectiveness of strategies to prevent long-term opioid therapy following trauma. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of these strategies were also assessed. METHODS: We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey. Potential participants were identified by trauma program managers and directors of the targeted departments in three Canadian provinces. We designed our questionnaire using standard health survey research methods. The questionnaire was administered between April 2021 and November 2021. RESULTS: Our response rate was 47% (350/744), and 52% (181/350) of participants completed the entire survey. Most respondents (71%, 129/181) worked in teaching hospitals. Multimodal analgesia (93%, 240/257), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (77%, 198/257), and physical stimulation (75%, 193/257) were the strategies perceived to be the most frequently used. Several preventive strategies were perceived to be very effective by over 80% of respondents. Of these, some that were reported as not being frequently used were perceived to be among the most effective ones, including guidelines or protocols, assessing risk factors for opioid misuse, physical health follow-up by a professional, training for clinicians, patient education, and prescription monitoring systems. Staff shortages, time constraints, and organizational practices were identified as the main barriers to the implementation of the highest ranked preventive strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Several strategies to prevent long-term opioid therapy following trauma are perceived as being effective by those prescribing opioids in this population. Some of these strategies appear to be commonly used in everyday practice and others less so. Future research should focus on which preventive strategies should be given higher priority for implementation before assessing their effectiveness.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Évaluer comment les cliniciens canadiens impliqués dans les soins aux patients traumatisés et prescrivant des opioïdes perçoivent l'utilisation et l'efficacité des stratégies visant à prévenir le traitement prolongé par opioïde après un traumatisme. Les obstacles et facilitateurs de la mise en œuvre de ces stratégies ont aussi été analysés. MéTHODES: Nous avons réalisé une enquête transversale via le Web. Les participants potentiels ont été identifiés par les gestionnaires et directeurs de programmes de traumatologie des départements ciblés dans trois provinces canadiennes. Nous avons conçu notre questionnaire en utilisant la méthodologie de recherche usuelle des enquêtes de santé. Le questionnaire a été administré entre avril 2021 et novembre 2021. RéSULTATS: Notre taux de réponse a été de 47 % (350/744) et 52 % (181/350) des participants ont complété l'enquête dans sa totalité. La majorité des personnes interrogées (71 %, 129/181) travaillait dans des hôpitaux universitaires. L'analgésie multimodale (93 %, 240/257), les anti-inflammatoires non stéroïdiens (77 %, 198/257) et la stimulation physique (75 %, 193/257) étaient les stratégies perçues comme étant le plus fréquemment utilisées. Plusieurs stratégies préventives étaient perçues comme étant très efficaces par plus de 80 % des répondants. Parmi celles-ci, certaines étaient signalées comme n'étant pas utilisées très souvent, mais perçues comme étant les plus efficaces, notamment les lignes directrices et protocoles évaluant les facteurs de risque d'utilisation abusive des opioïdes, le suivi de la santé physique par un professionnel, la formation des cliniciens, l'éducation des patients et les systèmes de suivi des prescriptions. La pénurie de personnels, les contraintes de temps et les pratiques de l'établissement ont été identifiées comme étant les principaux obstacles à la mise en place des stratégies préventives classées parmi les premières. CONCLUSIONS: Plusieurs stratégies de prévention du traitement par opioïdes à long terme après un traumatisme sont perçues comme efficaces par ceux qui les prescrivent à cette population de patients. Certaines de ces stratégies apparaissent comme couramment utilisées dans la pratique quotidienne et d'autres moins souvent. La recherche future devrait se concentrer sur la détermination des stratégies préventives auxquelles il faudrait accorder la plus grande priorité de mise en œuvre avant d'évaluer leur efficacité.

"None of us are lying": an interpretive description of the search for legitimacy and the journey to access quality health services by individuals living with Long COVID.

BACKGROUND: Understanding of Long COVID has advanced through patient-led initiatives. However, research about barriers to accessing Long COVID services is limited. This study aimed to better understand the need for, access to, and quality of, Long COVID services. We explored health needs and experiences of services, including ability of services to address needs. METHODS: Our study was informed by the Levesque et al.'s (2013) "conceptual framework of access to health care." We used Interpretive Description, a qualitative approach partly aimed at informing clinical decisions. We recruited participants across five settings. Participants engaged in one-time, semi-structured, virtual interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim. We used reflexive thematic analysis. Best practice to ensure methodological rigour was employed. RESULTS: Three key themes were generated from 56 interviews. The first theme illustrated the rollercoaster-like nature of participants' Long COVID symptoms and the resulting impact on function and health. The second theme highlighted participants' attempts to access Long COVID services. Guidance received from healthcare professionals and self-advocacy impacted initial access. When navigating Long COVID services within the broader system, participants encountered barriers to access around stigma; appointment logistics; testing and 'normal' results; and financial precarity and affordability of services. The third theme illuminated common factors participants liked and disliked about Long COVID services. We framed each sub-theme as the key lesson (stemming from all likes and dislikes) that, if acted upon, the health system can use to improve the quality of Long COVID services. This provides tangible ways to improve the system based directly on what we heard from participants. CONCLUSION: With Long COVID services continuously evolving, our findings can inform decision makers within the health system to better understand the lived experiences of Long COVID and tailor services and policies appropriately.

"I wanted to know what was hurting so much": a qualitative study exploring patients' expectations and experiences with primary care management.

BACKGROUND: The management of shoulder pain is challenging for primary care clinicians considering that 40% of affected individuals remain symptomatic one year after initial consultation. Developing tailored knowledge mobilization interventions founded on evidence-based recommendations while also considering patients' expectations could improve primary care for shoulder pain. The aim of this qualitative study is to explore patients' expectations and experiences of their primary care consultation for shoulder pain. METHODS: In this qualitative study, participants with shoulder pain and having consulted a primary care clinician in the past year were interviewed. All the semi-structured interviews were transcribed verbatim, and inductive thematic analysis was performed to identify themes related to the participants' expectations and experiences of primary care consultations for shoulder pain. RESULTS: Thirteen participants with shoulder pain were interviewed (8 women, 5 men; mean age 50 ± 12 years). Eleven of them initially consulted a family physician or an emergency physician, and two participants initially consulted a physiotherapist. Four overarching themes related to patients' expectations and experiences were identified from our thematic analysis: 1) I can't sleep because of my shoulder; 2) I need to know what is happening with my shoulder; 3) But… we need to really see what is going on to help me!; and 4) Please take some time with me so I can understand what to do!. Several participants waited until they experienced a high level of shoulder pain before making an appointment since they were not confident about what their family physician could do to manage their condition. Although some participants felt that their physician took the time to listen to their concerns, many were dissatisfied with the limited assessment and education provided by the clinician. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing evidence-based recommendations while considering patients' expectations is important as it may improve patients' satisfaction with healthcare. Several participants reported that their expectations were not met, especially when it came to the explanations provided. One unexpected finding that emerged from this study was the waiting period between the onset of shoulder pain and when patients decided to consult their primary care clinician.

Swallowing the pill of adverse effects: A qualitative study of patients' and pharmacists' experiences and decision-making regarding the adverse effects of chronic pain medications.

INTRODUCTION: Pharmacological treatments of chronic pain can lead to numerous and sometimes serious adverse effects. Drawing on a social science approach to chronic illness, this study aimed to understand the experiences of people living with chronic pain and community pharmacists regarding the definition, prevention and management of analgesic adverse effects. METHODS: This qualitative study proceeded through 12 online focus groups (FGs) with people living with chronic pain (n = 26) and community pharmacists (n = 19), conducted between July 2020 and February 2021 in the province of Quebec, Canada. The semistructured discussion guides covered participants' definitions of adverse effects and decision-making regarding their prevention and management. Discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using grounded theory. RESULTS: Both people with chronic pain and pharmacists provided varying definitions of analgesic adverse effects depending on patients' social and clinical characteristics. Present quality of life and serious long-term risks related to treatment were described as key dimensions influencing adverse effect appraisal. Dilemmas and discrepancies occurred between patients and pharmacists when choosing to prioritize pain relief or adverse effect prevention. Some patients lacked information about their medications and wanted to be more involved in decisions, while many pharmacists were concerned by patients' self-management of adverse effects. Preventing opioid-related overdoses often led pharmacists to policing practices. Despite most pharmacists wishing they could have a key role in the management of pain and adverse effects face organizational and financial barriers. CONCLUSION: Defining, preventing and managing adverse effects in the treatment of chronic pain requires a person-centred approach and shared decision-making. Clinical training improvements and healthcare organization changes are needed to support pharmacists in providing patients with community-based follow-up and reliable information about the adverse effects of chronic pain treatments. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A person with lived experience of chronic pain was involved as a coinvestigator in the study. He contributed to shaping the study design and objectives, including major methodological decisions such as the choice of pharmacists as the most appropriate professionals to investigate. In addition, 26 individuals with chronic pain shared their experiences extensively during the FGs.

"It feels like an endless fight": a qualitative study exploring healthcare utilization of persons with rheumatic conditions waiting for pain clinic admission.

BACKGROUND: Individuals living with a rheumatic pain condition can face delays in accessing pain clinics, which prevents them from receiving timely treatment. Little is known regarding their specific healthcare utilization in order to alleviate pain while waiting to obtain services in pain clinics. Hence, the aim of this study was to explore the perceptions and experiences of persons living with rheumatic conditions regarding healthcare utilization while waiting to access a pain clinic. METHODS: In this qualitative descriptive study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with adults living with a painful rheumatic condition that reported either being waiting for admission in a pain clinic, having been referred but then denied pain clinic services, or having received services during the previous six months, in the province of Quebec, Canada. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, and an inductive thematic analysis was performed. RESULTS: Twenty-six individuals were interviewed (22 women and 4 men; mean age 54 ± 10 years). Three themes were identified: 1) lacking guidance in identifying solutions to their complex and multidimensional needs, 2) struggling to obtain and maintain services due to systemic access barriers, and 3) displaying resilience through a search for accessible and sustainable self-management strategies. CONCLUSIONS: The current approaches and structures of health services fail to adequately answer the service needs of individuals experiencing painful rheumatic conditions. Important shifts are required in pain education, in increasing access to multidisciplinary approaches at the primary care level and in breaking down barriers individuals with chronic pain face to receive appropriate and timely care.

Evaluating a new referral pathway from physical therapists to rheumatologists: A qualitative study.

Early referral to rheumatology of people with suspected inflammatory arthritis is associated with better outcomes. Typically, these individuals are seen by a family physician who would assess the need for rheumatology referral. However, some may first consult a physical therapist where no physician referral is required. New interprofessional referral pathways, such as direct referral from a physical therapist to a rheumatologist, could enhance early access to a rheumatologist. Our objective was to explore perceptions of clinicians and people with inflammatory arthritis regarding physical therapists referring directly to rheumatologists. We used purposive and snowball sampling to recruit participants for five focus groups: rheumatologists, family physicians, physical therapists, people with inflammatory arthritis, and a mixed group of physical therapists and people with inflammatory arthritis. Thematic analysis revealed four core themes: difficulties accessing care, reluctance of family physicians and rheumatologists toward the new pathway, interprofessional relationships (or lack thereof), and opportunities along the referral pathway. The conclusions are that care must be optimized by ensuring swift referral for those who require it; and that there is a need for knowledge translation to all actors on the advantages of this new pathway.

The burden of waiting to access pain clinic services: perceptions and experiences of patients with rheumatic conditions.

BACKGROUND: Extensive waiting times before receiving services is a major barrier to adequate pain management. Waiting times may have a detrimental impact on patients' conditions and quality of life. However, there remains a lack of knowledge on the actual experiences of patients waiting to receive services, especially for those with rheumatic conditions. The present study aimed to gain an in-depth understanding of perceptions and experiences of patients with rheumatic conditions regarding access to pain clinic services. The secondary objective was to identify possible solutions to improve this access according to patients' perspectives. METHODS: This qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews was conducted with adults with rheumatic conditions waiting to access pain clinics in the province of Quebec, Canada. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-six participants were interviewed (22 women and 4 men; mean age 54 ± 10 years). Four main themes were identified: 1) the perception that waiting time is unacceptably long; 2) how the lack of information affects patients' experiences of waiting; 3) patients' various expectations towards the pain clinic, from high hopes to disillusionment and 4) carrying an emotional, physical and financial burden resulting from the wait. Participants reported several solutions to improve the experience of waiting, including providing information to patients, increasing resources, improving prioritization processes and care coordination, and providing alternative interventions to patients during the wait. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with rheumatic conditions, access to pain clinic services is challenging due to extensive waiting times. The burden it imposes on them adds to the existing challenge of living with a chronic rheumatic condition. The solutions identified by participants could serve as building blocks to develop and implement measures to improve patients' experience of accessing pain-related services.

Comparing ERAS-outpatient versus standard-inpatient hip and knee replacements: a mixed methods study exploring the experience of patients who underwent both.

BACKGROUND: Optimizing patients' total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA) experience is as crucial for providing high quality care as improving safety and clinical effectiveness. Yet, little evidence is available on patient experience in standard-inpatient and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)-outpatient programs. Therefore, this study aimed to gain a more in-depth understanding of the patient experience of ERAS-outpatient programs in comparison to standard-inpatient programs. METHODS: We conducted a convergent mixed methods study of 48 consecutive patients who experienced both standard-inpatient and ERAS-outpatient THA/TKA contralaterally. A reflective thematic analysis was conducted based on data collected via a questionnaire. Bivariate correlations between the patient experience and patients' characteristics, clinical outcomes and care components satisfaction were performed. Then, the quantitative and qualitative data were integrated together. RESULTS: The theme Support makes the difference for better and for worse was identified by patients as crucial to their experience in both joint replacement programs. On the other hand, patients identified 3 themes distinguishing their ERAS-outpatient from their standard-inpatient experience: 1) Minimizing inconvenience, 2) Home sweet home and 3) Returning to normal function and activities. Potential optimization expressed by patients were to receive more preoperative information, additional postoperative rehabilitation sessions, and ensuring better coherence of care between hospital and home care teams. Weak to moderate positive and statistically significant correlations were found between patients' THA/TKA experience and satisfaction with pain management, hospital stay, postoperative recovery, home care, and overall results (rs = + [0.36-0.66], p-value < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Whatever the perioperative program, the key to improving patients' THA/TKA experience lies in improving support throughout the care episode. However, compared to standard-inpatient care, the ERAS-outpatient program improves patients' experience by providing dedicated support in postoperative care, reducing postoperative inconvenience, optimizing pain management, returning home sooner, and recovering and regaining function sooner. Patients' THA/TKA experience could further be enhanced by optimizing the information provided to the patient, the rehabilitation program and the coherence between care teams.

Effect of thermal therapy and exercises on acute low back pain: a protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is the first cause of years lived with disability worldwide. This is due to the development of chronic pain. Thus, it is necessary to identify the best therapeutic approaches in the acute phase of LBP to limit the transition to chronic pain. Superficial heat presents the highest level of evidence for short-term reduction in pain and disability in acute LBP. Physical activity is also recommended to avoid transition to chronic LBP, but there is a lack of evidence to determine its effect to reduce acute LBP. Also, the long-term effects of these interventions are unknown. This is a protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to determine the short and long-term effects of wearable continuous low-level thermal therapy, in combination with exercises or not, on disability and pain. METHODS/DESIGN: Sixty-nine participants with acute LBP will be randomly assigned to one of three intervention programs: 1) thermal therapy, 2) thermal therapy + exercises, and 3) control. The interventions will be applied for 7 continuous days. The primary outcome will be disability and secondary outcomes will be pain intensity, pain-related fear, self-efficacy, number of steps walked and perception of change. The evaluators will be blinded to the interventions, and participants will be blinded to other groups' interventions. Primary and secondary outcomes will be compared between intervention groups. DISCUSSION: This study will provide new evidence about acute LBP treatments, to limit transition to chronicity. This will be the first study to measure the long-term effects of wearable continuous low-level thermal therapy, combined or not to exercises. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This RCT has been retrospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03986047 ) on June 14th, 2019.

Physiotherapists' ability to diagnose and manage shoulder disorders in an outpatient orthopedic clinic: results from a concordance study.

BACKGROUND: Advanced practice physiotherapy has emerged as a promising solution to improve health care access because access to orthopedic care is limited in several countries. However, evidence supporting advanced practice physiotherapy models for the management of shoulder pain remains scarce. The purpose of this study was to establish diagnostic, surgical triage, and medical imaging agreement between advanced practice physiotherapists (APPs) and orthopedic surgeons (OSs) for the management of patients with shoulder disorders in an outpatient orthopedic clinic. METHODS: Patients referred to an OS for shoulder complaints were recruited and independently assessed by an OS and an APP. Each provider completed a standardized form indicating diagnosis, imaging test requests, and triage of surgical candidates. Patient satisfaction with care was recorded with the 9-item Visit-Specific Satisfaction Questionnaire (VSQ-9). Inter-rater concordance was calculated with the Cohen κ, prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted κ, and associated 95% confidence interval (CI). We used χ2 tests to compare differences between providers in terms of treatment plan options and Student t tests to compare patient satisfaction between providers. RESULTS: Fifty participants were evaluated. Good diagnostic agreement was observed between providers (κ, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67-0.93). Agreement for triage of surgical candidates was moderate (κ, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.21-0.71) as APPs tended to refer patients more often to OSs for further evaluation. Imaging test request agreement was moderate as well (κ, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.19-0.66). Patient satisfaction with care was high, with no significant differences found between providers (P = .70). CONCLUSION: APPs could improve access to orthopedic care for shoulder disorders by safely initiating patient care without compromising satisfaction. These results support further development and evaluation of APP care for orthopedic patients presenting with shoulder disorders.

What are private sector physiotherapists' perceptions regarding interprofessional and intraprofessional work for managing low back pain?

In the last decades, interactions between health professionals have mostly been discussed in the context of interprofessional teamwork where professionals work closely together and share a team identity. Comparatively, little work has been done to explore interactions that occur between professionals in contexts where traditionally formal structures have been less supporting the implementation of interprofessional teamwork, such as in the private healthcare sector. The objective of this study was to identify private sector physiotherapists' perceptions of interprofessional and intraprofessional work regarding interventions for adults with low back pain. This was a cross-sectional survey of 327 randomly-selected physiotherapists. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. A majority of physiotherapists reported positive effects of interprofessional work for their clients, themselves and their workplaces. Proximity of physiotherapists with other professionals, clinical workloads, and client's financial situation were perceived as important factors influencing the implementation of interprofessional work. Low back pain is a highly prevalent and disabling condition. The results of this study indicate that integrating interprofessional work in the management of low back pain in the private sector is warranted. Furthermore, the implementation of interprofessional work is viewed by practicing physiotherapists as dependent upon certain client-, professional- and organizational-level factors.

Supporting ethics educators in Canadian occupational therapy and physical therapy programs: A national interprofessional knowledge exchange project.

Ethics education is the cornerstone of professional practice, fostering knowledge and respect for core ethical values among healthcare professionals. Ethics is also a subject well-suited for interprofessional education and collaboration. However, there are few initiatives to gather experiences and share resources among ethics educators in rehabilitation. We thus undertook a knowledge exchange project to: 1) share knowledge about ethics training across Canadian occupational and physical therapy programs, and 2) build a community of educators dedicated to improving ethics education. The objectives of this paper are to describe this interprofessional knowledge exchange project involving ethics educators (with a diversity of professional and disciplinary backgrounds) from Canadian occupational and physical therapy programs as well as analyze its outcomes based on participants' experiences/perceptions. Two knowledge exchange strategies were employed: an interactive one-day workshop and a wiki platform. An immediate post-workshop questionnaire evaluated the degree to which participants' expectations were met. Structured telephone interviews 9-10 months after the workshop collected participants' perceptions on whether (and if so, how) the project influenced their teaching or led to further interprofessional collaborations. Open-ended questions from the post-workshop questionnaires and individual interviews were analyzed using qualitative methods. Of 40 ethics educators contacted, 23 participated in the workshop and 17 in the follow-up interview. Only 6 participants logged into the wiki from its launch to the end of data collection. Five themes emerged from the qualitative analysis: 1) belonging and networking; 2) sharing and collaborating; 3) changing (or not) ways of teaching ethics; 4) sustaining the network; and 5) envisioning the future of ethics education. The project attained many of its goals, despite encountering some challenges. While the wiki platform proved to be of limited benefit in advancing the project goals, the interactive format and collaborative nature of the one-day workshop were described as rewarding and effective in bringing together occupational therapy and physical therapy educators to meet, network, and share knowledge.

What can organizations do to improve family physicians' interprofessional collaboration? Results of a survey of primary care in Quebec.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the degree of collaboration in primary health care organizations between FPs and other health care professionals; and to identify organizational factors associated with such collaboration. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Primary health care organizations in the Montreal and Monteregie regions of Quebec. PARTICIPANTS: Physicians or administrative managers from 376 organizations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Degree of collaboration between FPs and other specialists and between FPs and nonphysician health professionals. RESULTS: Almost half (47.1%) of organizations reported a high degree of collaboration between FPs and other specialists, but a high degree of collaboration was considerably less common between FPs and nonphysician professionals (16.5%). Clinic collaboration with a hospital and having more patients with at least 1 chronic disease were associated with higher FP collaboration with other specialists. The proportion of patients with at least 1 chronic disease was the only factor associated with collaboration between FPs and nonphysician professionals. CONCLUSION: There is room for improvement regarding interprofessional collaboration in primary health care, especially between FPs and nonphysician professionals. Organizations that manage patients with more chronic diseases collaborate more with both non-FP specialists and nonphysician professionals.

Physiotherapy practice in the private sector: organizational characteristics and models.

BACKGROUND: Even if a large proportion of physiotherapists work in the private sector worldwide, very little is known of the organizations within which they practice. Such knowledge is important to help understand contexts of practice and how they influence the quality of services and patient outcomes. The purpose of this study was to: 1) describe characteristics of organizations where physiotherapists practice in the private sector, and 2) explore the existence of a taxonomy of organizational models. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional quantitative survey of 236 randomly-selected physiotherapists. Participants completed a purpose-designed questionnaire online or by telephone, covering organizational vision, resources, structures and practices. Organizational characteristics were analyzed descriptively, while organizational models were identified by multiple correspondence analyses. RESULTS: Most organizations were for-profit (93.2%), located in urban areas (91.5%), and within buildings containing multiple businesses/organizations (76.7%). The majority included multiple providers (89.8%) from diverse professions, mainly physiotherapy assistants (68.7%), massage therapists (67.3%) and osteopaths (50.2%). Four organizational models were identified: 1) solo practice, 2) middle-scale multiprovider, 3) large-scale multiprovider and 4) mixed. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study provide a detailed description of the organizations where physiotherapists practice, and highlight the importance of human resources in differentiating organizational models. Further research examining the influences of these organizational characteristics and models on outcomes such as physiotherapists' professional practices and patient outcomes are needed.

Interprofessional practices of physiotherapists working with adults with low back pain in Québec's private sector: results of a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Collaboration and interprofessional practices are highly valued in health systems, because they are thought to improve outcomes of care for persons with complex health problems, such as low back pain. Physiotherapists, like all health providers, are encouraged to take part in interprofessional practices. However, little is known about these practices, especially for private sector physiotherapists. This study aimed to: 1) explore how physiotherapists working in the private sector with adults with low back pain describe their interprofessional practices, 2) identify factors that influence their interprofessional practices, and 3) identify their perceived effects. METHODS: Participants were 13 physiotherapists, 10 women/3 men, having between 3 and 21 years of professional experience. For this descriptive qualitative study, we used face-to-face semi-structured interviews and conducted content analysis encompassing data coding and thematic regrouping. RESULTS: Physiotherapists described interprofessional practices heterogeneously, including numerous processes such as sharing information and referring. Factors that influenced physiotherapists' interprofessional practices were related to patients, providers, organizations, and wider systems (e.g. professional system). Physiotherapists mostly viewed positive effects of interprofessional practices, including elements such as gaining new knowledge as a provider and being valued in one's own role, as well as improvements in overall treatment and outcome. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study offers new insights into the interprofessional practices of physiotherapists working with adults with low back pain, as perceived by the physiotherapists' themselves. Based on the results, the development of strategies aiming to increase interprofessionalism in the management of low back pain would most likely require taking into consideration factors associated with patients, providers, the organizations within which they work, and the wider systems.

Group Physical Therapy Programs for Military Members With Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of personalized, supervised group-based programs (ie, group physical therapy programs) and usual one-on-one physical therapy care (ie, usual physical therapy care) on disability for military personnel suffering from low back pain, rotator cuff-related shoulder pain, patellofemoral pain syndrome, or lateral ankle sprain. Secondary outcomes were pain severity, pain-related fear, health-related quality of life, and patients' satisfaction with their condition and care. DESIGN: Non-inferiority pragmatic randomized clinical trial. METHODS: One hundred twenty military personnel from the Canadian Armed Forces, experiencing 1 of 4 targeted musculoskeletal disorders, were consecutively recruited and randomly assigned to group physical therapy programs or usual physical therapy care. Disability, pain severity, pain-related fear, and health-related quality-of-life outcomes were measured at 6, 12, and 26 weeks after baseline. Satisfaction with treatment was evaluated at the end of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses using linear mixed models with random effects were used to compare the effects of interventions. Chi-square tests were used to compare satisfaction. RESULTS: There were no significant Time × Group interactions for any of the primary and secondary outcomes (Time × Group: P>.67). Satisfaction with treatment also did not differ between groups (P>.05). Statistically significant and clinically important improvements were observed in both groups for all outcomes after 12 weeks (Time effect: P<.01), except for health-related quality of life (P = .13). CONCLUSION: Group physical therapy programs were not inferior to usual physical therapy care for managing pain, functional capacity, and patients' satisfaction with care of military personnel presenting with various musculoskeletal disorders. Both interventions led to clinical and statistical improvement in pain and function in the mid and long term. Group physical therapy could be an effective strategy to enhance access to care. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(6):1-10. Epub 26 Mar 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12342.

Establishing the prognostic profile of patients with work-related musculoskeletal disorders: Development and acceptability of the MAPS questionnaire.

PURPOSE: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMD) are the most common causes of disability worldwide and are associated with significant use of healthcare. One way to optimize the clinical outcomes of injured workers receiving rehabilitation is to identify and address individual prognostic factors (PF), which can facilitate the personalization of the treatment plan. As there is no pragmatic and systematic method to collect prognostic-related data, the purpose of the study was to develop and assess the acceptability of a set of questionnaires to establish the "prognostic profile" of workers with WRMD. METHODS: We utilized a multistep process to inform the acceptability of the Measures Associated to PrognoStic (MAPS) questionnaire. During STEP-1, a preliminary version of the was developed through a literature search followed by an expert consensus including a patient-advisor. During STEP-2, future users (rehabilitation professionals, healthcare administrators and compensation officers) were consulted through an online survey and were asked to rate the relevance of each content item; items that obtained ≥80% of "totally agree" answers were included. They were also asked to prioritize PF according to their usefulness for clinical decision-making, as well as perceived efficacy to enhance the treatment plan. RESULTS: The questionnaire was developed with three categories: the outcome predicted, the unique PF, and prognostic tools. Personal PF (i.e.: coping strategies, fear-avoidance beliefs), pain related PF (i.e.: pain intensity/severity, duration of pain), and work-related PF (i.e.: work physical demands, work accommodations) were identified to be totally relevant and included in the questionnaire. 84% of the respondents agreed that their patients could complete the MAPS questionnaire in their clinical setting, while 75% totally agreed that the questionnaire is useful to personalize rehabilitation interventions. CONCLUSION: The MAPS questionnaire was deemed acceptable to establish the "prognostic profile" of injured workers and help the clinicians in the treatment decision-making process.

Personalizing rehabilitation for individuals with musculoskeletal impairments: Feasibility of implementation of the Measures Associated to Prognostic (MAPS) tool.

INTRODUCTION: The Measures Associated to PrognoStic (MAPS) tool is a standardized questionnaire that integrates validated prognostic tools to detect the presence of biopsychosocial prognostic factors in patients consulting for musculoskeletal disorders. PURPOSE: The objectives were to assess the: 1) feasibility of implementation of the MAPS tool, 2) clinicians' acceptability of the dashboard, and 3) patients' acceptability of the MAPS tool. METHODS: Twenty physiotherapists and two occupational therapists from seven outpatient musculoskeletal clinics were recruited to implement the MAPS tool during a 3-month timeframe, where new patients completed the questionnaire upon initial assessment. The results were presented to the clinicians via a dashboard. Surveys and semi-structured interviews were conducted to measure feasibility and acceptability. RESULTS: Six out of 11 feasibility criteria (55%) and 21 out of 24 acceptability criteria (88%) reached the a priori threshold for success. The interviews allowed us to identify three main themes to facilitate implementation: 1) limiting the burden, 2) ensuring patients' understanding of the tool's purpose, and 3) integrating the dashboard as a clinical information tool. CONCLUSION: Our quantitative and qualitative results support the feasibility of implementation and acceptability of the MAPS tool pending minor adjustments. Depicting the patients' prognostic profile has the potential to help clinicians optimize their interventions for patients presenting with musculoskeletal disorders.

Low back pain patients' experience and expectations: A qualitative study focusing on physiotherapist and physician care.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a common and disabling musculoskeletal disorder. LBP experiences and expectations can vary from one person to another and influence their clinical outcomes. Despite the existence of numerous evidence-based treatment recommendations, LBP management in primary care remains challenging. This study aims to investigate the experiences and expectations of patients with LPB in primary care settings. METHODS: A qualitative study with an inductive thematic analysis was conducted. Semi-structured interviews were performed using individuals who had experienced LBP in the past year and had consulted a family physician (FP) or a physiotherapist (PT). RESULTS: Ten participants with LBP were interviewed (5 women, 5 men, mean age 49 ± 17). Five themes were identified: (1) I am always upset because I can't do anything; (2) I waited to consult; I thought it would go away; (3) I want to see what is going on with my LBP; (4) I want to see the person that will provide the right treatment; (5) I need support to get over it. Participants consulted when their pain was severe and disabling. They expected an imaging test to explain the cause of their LBP and placed more importance on the imaging test results than the FP's or PT's evaluation. Their opinions on care selection and being listened to were important for the participants. CONCLUSION: This study has highlighted the importance of the patient's point of view in their care. This consideration is important to ensure a comprehensive and collaborative approach with evidence-based practice care.

Is One Enough? The Effectiveness of a Single Session of Education and Exercise Compared to Multiple Sessions of a Multimodal Physiotherapy Intervention for Adults With Spinal Disorders in an Advanced Practice Physiotherapy Model of Care: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of a single session of education and exercise compared with multiple sessions of a multimodal physiotherapy intervention for adults with spinal disorders in an advanced practice physiotherapy specialized spine model of care. DESIGN: Pragmatic randomized controlled trial. METHODS: We randomized patients with spinal disorders, who were referred for a spinal surgery consultation and triaged as nonsurgical cases by an advanced practice physiotherapist, to a single session of education and prescription of an exercise program (n = 52) or multiple sessions (6 in total) of a multimodal physiotherapy intervention (n = 54). The primary outcomes were the short form Brief Pain Inventory pain severity scale (BPI-S) and the Brief Pain Inventory pain interference scale (BPI-I), and secondary outcomes included disability, quality of life, catastrophization, and satisfaction. Linear mixed models were used to assess differences between groups across time points at 6, 12, and 26 weeks. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences on the BPI-S and only a significant improvement at 6 weeks on the BPI-I in the multiple-session group (mean difference: -0.96/10; 95% CI, -1.87 to -0.05). There were no other statistically significant differences between groups, except for satisfaction where participants in the multiple-session group reported statistically significantly greater satisfaction on the 9-item Visit-Specific Satisfaction Questionnaire and the MedRisk questionnaire. Both groups saw significant improvements over time on all outcomes except for the BPI-S. CONCLUSION: Adding supervised multimodal physiotherapy sessions did not result in better clinical outcomes when compared to a single session of education and exercise. Patients were more satisfied with the multiple-session approach. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(10):1-13. Epub 9 September 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12618.