Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 81
Filter
1.
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract ; 24(2): 269-285, 2019 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30426324

ABSTRACT

Financial support for institutional research is relatively stagnant, and thus institutions are likely to seek tuition revenue to offset the costs of research and teaching. It is likely that this has led to increases in tuition driven activities, and thus has limited research activities of academic physical therapy (PT) programs in particular. However, the relationships between sources of program revenue, the number of graduates from PT programs, and the scholarly production of PT faculty have not been studied. The purpose of this paper is to study the effects of types of funding-including research grants and tuition-on the number of physical therapy graduates from each program and the research productivity of physical therapy faculty. Data from 2008 to 2016 were utilized to perform a fixed-effects panel analysis. Panel models created predictions for the number of graduates and the number of peer-reviewed publications for programs from grant funding, annual tuition, and number of funded faculty members. In any given program, a 1% increase in annual tuition is associated with 24% more graduates per year, but a single percentage point increase in the mix of NIH grant funding over other funding types is associated with 8% fewer graduates, all else equal. For every 1% increase in annual tuition, a program can expect to have 41% fewer publications per year. Those institutions with higher numbers of graduates tended to have higher numbers of publications. Higher annual program tuition appears to be associated with both higher numbers of physical therapy graduates and lower levels of publications. Different funding sources have variable effects on degree production and scholarly productivity. Data are self-reported by programs on the Annual Accreditation Report, and cause and effect cannot be established through observational design.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/statistics & numerical data , Financial Support , Physical Therapy Specialty/statistics & numerical data , Students/statistics & numerical data , Universities/statistics & numerical data , Biomedical Research/economics , Biomedical Research/trends , Efficiency , Faculty/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Models, Economic , National Institutes of Health (U.S.)/statistics & numerical data , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/trends , Publishing/statistics & numerical data , Research Support as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Training Support/statistics & numerical data , United States , Universities/economics , Universities/trends
2.
Med Teach ; 40(12): 1221-1230, 2018 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29216780

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Student failure creates additional economic costs. Knowing the cost of failure helps to frame its economic burden relative to other educational issues, providing an evidence-base to guide priority setting and allocation of resources. The Ingredients Method is a cost-analysis approach which has been previously applied to health professions education research. In this study, the Ingredients Method is introduced, and applied to a case study, investigating the cost of pre-clinical student failure. METHODS: The four step Ingredients Method was introduced and applied: (1) identify and specify resource items, (2) measure volume of resources in natural units, (3) assign monetary prices to resource items, and (4) analyze and report costs. Calculations were based on a physiotherapy program at an Australian university. RESULTS: The cost of failure was Ā£5991 per failing student, distributed across students (70%), the government (21%), and the university (8%). If the cost of failure and attrition is distributed among the remaining continuing cohort, the cost per continuing student educated increases from Ā£9923 to Ā£11,391 per semester. CONCLUSIONS: The economics of health professions education is complex. Researchers should consider both accuracy and feasibility in their costing approach, toward the goal of better informing cost-conscious decision-making.


Subject(s)
Health Occupations/economics , Physical Therapists/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Student Dropouts , Universities/economics , Australia , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Health Occupations/education , Humans , Organizational Case Studies , Physical Therapists/education , Physical Therapy Specialty/education , Students, Health Occupations , Surveys and Questionnaires
3.
PLoS Med ; 14(10): e1002412, 2017 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29088237

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Disinvestment (removal, reduction, or reallocation) of routinely provided health services can be difficult when there is little published evidence examining whether the services are effective or not. Evidence is required to understand if removing these services produces outcomes that are inferior to keeping such services in place. However, organisational imperatives, such as budget cuts, may force healthcare providers to disinvest from these services before the required evidence becomes available. There are presently no experimental studies examining the effectiveness of allied health services (e.g., physical therapy, occupational therapy, and social work) provided on weekends across acute medical and surgical hospital wards, despite these services being routinely provided internationally. The aim of this study was to understand the impact of removing weekend allied health services from acute medical and surgical wards using a disinvestment-specific non-inferiority research design. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted 2 stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trials between 1 February 2014 and 30 April 2015 among patients on 12 acute medical or surgical hospital wards spread across 2 hospitals. The hospitals involved were 2 metropolitan teaching hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. Data from n = 14,834 patients were collected for inclusion in Trial 1, and n = 12,674 in Trial 2. Trial 1 was a disinvestment-specific non-inferiority stepped-wedge trial where the 'current' weekend allied health service was incrementally removed from participating wards each calendar month, in a random order, while Trial 2 used a conventional non-inferiority stepped-wedge design, where a 'newly developed' service was incrementally reinstated on the same wards as in Trial 1. Primary outcome measures were patient length of stay (proportion staying longer than expected and mean length of stay), the proportion of patients experiencing any adverse event, and the proportion with an unplanned readmission within 28 days of discharge. The 'no weekend allied health service' condition was considered to be not inferior if the 95% CIs of the differences between this condition and the condition with weekend allied health service delivery were below a 2% increase in the proportion of patients who stayed in hospital longer than expected, a 2% increase in the proportion who had an unplanned readmission within 28 days, a 2% increase in the proportion who had any adverse event, and a 1-day increase in the mean length of stay. The current weekend allied health service included physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, dietetics, social work, and allied health assistant services in line with usual care at the participating sites. The newly developed weekend allied health service allowed managers at each site to reprioritise tasks being performed and the balance of hours provided by each professional group and on which days they were provided. Analyses conducted on an intention-to-treat basis demonstrated that there was no estimated effect size difference between groups in the proportion of patients staying longer than expected (weekend versus no weekend; estimated effect size difference [95% CI], p-value) in Trial 1 (0.40 versus 0.38; estimated effect size difference 0.01 [-0.01 to 0.04], p = 0.31, CI was both above and below non-inferiority margin), but the proportion staying longer than expected was greater with the newly developed service compared to its no weekend service control condition (0.39 versus 0.40; estimated effect size difference 0.02 [0.01 to 0.04], p = 0.04, CI was completely below non-inferiority margin) in Trial 2. Trial 1 and 2 findings were discordant for the mean length of stay outcome (Trial 1: 5.5 versus 6.3 days; estimated effect size difference 1.3 days [0.9 to 1.8], p < 0.001, CI was both above and below non-inferiority margin; Trial 2: 5.9 versus 5.0 days; estimated effect size difference -1.6 days [-2.0 to -1.1], p < 0.001, CI was completely below non-inferiority margin). There was no difference between conditions for the proportion who had an unplanned readmission within 28 days in either trial (Trial 1: 0.01 [-0.01 to 0.03], p = 0.18, CI was both above and below non-inferiority margin; Trial 2: -0.01 [-0.02 to 0.01], p = 0.62, CI completely below non-inferiority margin). There was no difference between conditions in the proportion of patients who experienced any adverse event in Trial 1 (0.01 [-0.01 to 0.03], p = 0.33, CI was both above and below non-inferiority margin), but a lower proportion of patients had an adverse event in Trial 2 when exposed to the no weekend allied health condition (-0.03 [-0.05 to -0.004], p = 0.02, CI completely below non-inferiority margin). Limitations of this research were that 1 of the trial wards was closed by the healthcare provider after Trial 1 and could not be included in Trial 2, and that both withdrawing the current weekend allied health service model and installing a new one may have led to an accommodation period for staff to adapt to the new service settings. Stepped-wedge trials are potentially susceptible to bias from naturally occurring change over time at the service level; however, this was adjusted for in our analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In Trial 1, criteria to say that the no weekend allied health condition was non-inferior to current weekend allied health condition were not met, while neither the no weekend nor current weekend allied health condition demonstrated superiority. In Trial 2, the no weekend allied health condition was non-inferior to the newly developed weekend allied health condition across all primary outcomes, and superior for the outcomes proportion of patients staying longer than expected, proportion experiencing any adverse event, and mean length of stay. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12613001231730 and ACTRN12613001361796.


Subject(s)
After-Hours Care/organization & administration , Dietetics/organization & administration , Health Services , Hospital Units , Occupational Therapy/organization & administration , Physical Therapy Specialty/organization & administration , Social Work/organization & administration , After-Hours Care/economics , Allied Health Personnel , Australia , Dietetics/economics , Hospitalization , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Linear Models , Multilevel Analysis , Occupational Therapy/economics , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Social Work/economics
4.
Mo Med ; 114(4): 272-277, 2017.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30228610

ABSTRACT

Orthopaedics contributes a significant benefit to the Missouri economy. Economic modeling and data quantified the direct and indirect impact within Missouri. Multipliers were applied to direct expenditures to calculate the indirect impact attributable to initial spending. Nearly $1.8 billion can be attributed to the output of orthopaedic related services. The related physical therapy industry increases this figure to nearly $2.3 billion. It is clear that orthopaedics benefits Missouri with both medical services and economic growth.


Subject(s)
Health Expenditures/statistics & numerical data , Orthopedics/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Health Expenditures/trends , Humans , Missouri/epidemiology , Orthopedic Surgeons/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires
5.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther ; 39(4): 229-39, 2016 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27166404

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to compare patterns of utilization and charges generated by medical doctors (MDs), doctors of chiropractic (DCs), and physical therapists (PTs) for the treatment of headache in North Carolina. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of claims data from the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees from 2000 to 2009. Data were extracted from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina for the North Carolina State Health Plan using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, diagnostic codes for headache. The claims were separated by individual provider type, combination of provider types, and referral patterns. RESULTS: The majority of patients and claims were in the MD-only or MD plus referral patterns. Chiropractic patterns represented less than 10% of patients. Care patterns with single-provider types and no referrals incurred the least charges on average for headache. When care did not include referral providers or services, MD with DC care was generally less expensive than MD care with PT. However, when combined with referral care, MD care with PT was generally less expensive. Compared with MD-only care, risk-adjusted charges (available 2006-2009) for patients in the middle risk quintile were significantly less for DC-only care. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization and expenditures for headache treatment increased from 2000 to 2009 across all provider groups. MD care represented the majority of total allowed charges in this study. MD care and DC care, alone or in combination, were overall the least expensive patterns of headache care. Risk-adjusted charges were significantly less for DC-only care.


Subject(s)
Fees and Charges/statistics & numerical data , Headache/therapy , Insurance Claim Review/statistics & numerical data , Manipulation, Chiropractic/statistics & numerical data , Physical Therapy Modalities/statistics & numerical data , Chiropractic/economics , Chiropractic/statistics & numerical data , Costs and Cost Analysis , Headache/economics , Humans , Insurance Claim Review/economics , Manipulation, Chiropractic/economics , Medicine/statistics & numerical data , North Carolina/epidemiology , Osteopathic Medicine/economics , Osteopathic Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Physical Therapy Modalities/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/statistics & numerical data , Physicians/economics , Physicians/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/economics , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies
6.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther ; 39(4): 240-51, 2016 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27166405

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to compare utilization and charges generated by medical doctors (MD), doctors of chiropractic (DC) and physical therapists (PT) by provider patterns of care for the treatment of neck pain in North Carolina. METHODS: This was an analysis of neck-pain-related closed claim data from the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees (NCSHP) from 2000 to 2009. Data were extracted from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina for the NCSHP using ICD-9 diagnostic codes for uncomplicated neck pain (UNP) and complicated neck pain (CNP). RESULTS: Care patterns with single-provider types and no referrals incurred the least average charges for both UNP and CNP. When care did not include referral providers or services, for either UNP or CNP, MD care with PT was generally less expensive than MD care with DC care. However, when care involved referral providers or services, MD and PT care was on average more expensive than MD and DC care for either UNP or CNP. Risk-adjusted charges for patients in the middle quintile of risk (available 2006-2009) were lower for chiropractic patients with or without medical care or referral care to other providers. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractic care alone or DC with MD care incurred appreciably fewer charges for UNP or CNP compared to MD care with or without PT care, when care included referral providers or services. This finding was reversed when care did not include referral providers or services. Risk-adjusted charges for UNP and CNP patients were lower for DC care patterns.


Subject(s)
Fees and Charges/statistics & numerical data , Insurance Claim Review/statistics & numerical data , Manipulation, Chiropractic/statistics & numerical data , Neck Pain/therapy , Physical Therapy Modalities/statistics & numerical data , Chiropractic/economics , Chiropractic/statistics & numerical data , Costs and Cost Analysis , Humans , Insurance Claim Review/economics , Manipulation, Chiropractic/economics , Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Neck Pain/economics , North Carolina/epidemiology , Osteopathic Medicine/economics , Osteopathic Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Physical Therapy Modalities/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/statistics & numerical data , Physicians/economics , Physicians/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/economics , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies
7.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther ; 39(4): 252-62, 2016 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27166406

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to compare utilization and charges generated by medical doctors (MD), doctors of chiropractic (DC) and physical therapists (PT) by patterns of care for the treatment of low back pain in North Carolina. METHODS: This was an analysis of low-back-pain-related closed claim data from the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees from 2000 to 2009. Data were extracted from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina for the North Carolina State Health Plan using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision diagnostic codes for uncomplicated low back pain (ULBP) and complicated low back pain (CLBP). RESULTS: Care patterns with single-provider types and no referrals incurred the least charges on average for both ULBP and CLBP. When care did not include referral providers or services, for ULBP, MD and DC care was on average $465 less than MD and PT care. For CLBP, MD and DC care averaged $965 more than MD and PT care. However, when care involved referral providers or services, MD and DC care was on average $1600 less when compared to MD and PT care for ULBP and $1885 less for CLBP. Risk-adjusted charges (available 2006-2009) for patients in the middle quintile of risk were significantly less for DC care patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Chiropractic care alone or DC with MD care incurred appreciably fewer charges for ULBP than MD care with or without PT care. This finding was reversed for CLBP. Adjusted charges for both ULBP and CLBP patients were significantly lower for DC patients.


Subject(s)
Fees and Charges/statistics & numerical data , Insurance Claim Review/statistics & numerical data , Low Back Pain/therapy , Manipulation, Chiropractic/statistics & numerical data , Physical Therapy Modalities/statistics & numerical data , Chiropractic/economics , Chiropractic/statistics & numerical data , Costs and Cost Analysis , Humans , Insurance Claim Review/economics , Low Back Pain/economics , Manipulation, Chiropractic/economics , Medicine/statistics & numerical data , North Carolina/epidemiology , Osteopathic Medicine/economics , Osteopathic Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Physical Therapy Modalities/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/statistics & numerical data , Physicians/economics , Physicians/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/economics , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies
8.
Rural Remote Health ; 16(2): 3686, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27289169

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: A recent exploration of factors affecting rural physiotherapy service provision revealed considerable variation in services available between communities of the study. Multiple factors combined to influence local service provision, including macro level policy and funding decisions, service priorities and fiscal constraints of regional health services and capacity and capabilities at the physiotherapy service level. The aim of this article is to describe the variation in local service provision, the factors influencing service provision and the impact on availability of physiotherapy services. METHODS: A priority-sequence mixed methods design structured the collection and integration of qualitative and quantitative data. The investigation area, a large part of one Australian state, was selected for the number of physiotherapy services and feasibility of conducting site visits. Stratified purposive sampling permitted exploration of rural physiotherapy with subgroups of interest, including physiotherapists, their colleagues, managers, and other key decision makers. Participant recruitment commenced with public sector physiotherapists and progressed to include private practitioners, team colleagues and managers. Surveys were mailed to key physiotherapy contacts in each public sector service in the area for distribution to physiotherapists, their colleagues and managers within their facility. Private physiotherapist principals working in the same communities were invited by the researcher to complete the physiotherapy survey. The survey collected demographic data, rural experience, work setting and number of colleagues, services provided, perspectives on factors influencing service provision and decisions about service provision. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with consenting physiotherapists and other key decision makers identified by local physiotherapists. Quantitative survey data were recorded in spreadsheets and analysed using descriptive statistics. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim, with transcripts provided to participants for review. Open-ended survey questions and interview transcripts were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Surveys were received from 11/25 (44%) of facilities in the investigation area, with a response rate of 29.4% (16/54) from public sector physiotherapists. A further 18 surveys were received: five from principals of private physiotherapy practices and 13 from colleagues and managers. Nineteen interviews were conducted: with 14 physiotherapists (nine public, five private), four other decision makers and one colleague. Three decision makers declined an interview. The variation in physiotherapy service availability between the 11 communities of this study prompted the researchers to consider how such variation could be reflected. The influential factors that emerged from participant comments included rurality and population, size and funding model of public hospitals, the number of public sector physiotherapists and private practices, and the availability of specialised paediatric and rehabilitation services. The factors described by participants were used to develop a conceptual framework or index of rural physiotherapy availability. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to make explicit the link between workforce maldistribution, the resultant rural workforce shortages and the implications for local service availability. This study sought to do so by investigating physiotherapy service provision within the rural communities of the investigation area. In doing so, varying levels of availability emerged within local communities. A conceptual framework combining key influencing factors is offered as a way to reflect the availability of physiotherapy services.


Subject(s)
Physical Therapy Specialty/organization & administration , Physical Therapy Specialty/statistics & numerical data , Rural Health Services/organization & administration , Rural Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Rural Population/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Accessibility/organization & administration , Hospital Bed Capacity , Hospitals, Public/organization & administration , Hospitals, Public/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Pediatrics , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Public Sector/organization & administration , Rural Health Services/economics , Workforce
9.
Health Econ ; 22(2): 212-23, 2013 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22431432

ABSTRACT

This paper investigates the technology cost structure in US physical therapy care. We exploit formal economic theories and a rich national data of providers to tease out implications for operational cost efficiencies. The 2008-2009 dataset comprising over 19 000 bi-weekly, site-specific physical therapy center observations across 28 US states and Occupational Employment Statistics data (Bureau of Labor Statistics) includes measures of output, three labor types (clinical, support, and administrative), and facilities (capital). We discuss findings from the iterative seemingly unrelated regression estimation system model. The generalized translog cost estimates indicate a well-behaved underlying technology structure. We also find the following: (i) factor demands are downwardly sloped; (ii) pair-wise factor relationships largely reflect substitutions; (iii) factor demand for physical therapists is more inelastic compared with that for administrative staff; and (iv) diminishing scale economies exist at the 25%, 50%, and 75% output (patient visits) levels. Our findings advance the timely economic understanding of operations in an increasingly important segment of the medical care sector that has, up-to-now (because of data paucity), been missing from healthcare efficiency analysis. Our work further provides baseline estimates for comparing operational efficiencies in physical therapy care after implementations of the 2010 US healthcare reforms.


Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Algorithms , Costs and Cost Analysis/methods , Health Status , United States
10.
J Health Care Finance ; 39(1): 51-78, 2012.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23155744

ABSTRACT

This article is designed to explain the subtle differences between the reimbursement requirements for coverage of physical therapy services in physician-based settings under the Medicare benefit policy manual chapter 15--covered medical and other health services. These billing challenges have a profound financial impact on the physical therapy industry. This article includes: (1) a general back ground of the reasons surrounding the increased regulations in the physical therapy industry; (2) general definitions within the physical therapy industry; (3) a discussion of the confusing and complicated bill ing requirements for physical therapy services; (4) a discussion of the "incident to" billing requirements within the physical therapy billing requirements; (5) an explanation of differing rules or policies within the physical therapy billing requirements; and (6) a discussion of why these rules regarding physical therapy billing requirements are essential to the delivery of quality of care within the physical therapy industry.


Subject(s)
Efficiency, Organizational/economics , Insurance Claim Reporting , Medicare , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Government Regulation , Medicaid , Organizational Policy , Physical Therapy Specialty/legislation & jurisprudence , United States
12.
J Telemed Telecare ; 27(1): 32-38, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31280639

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Recruitment of advanced-practice physiotherapists to regional and rural healthcare facilities in Queensland, Australia remains a challenge. To overcome this barrier, two different service delivery models (Fly-In, Fly-Out (FIFO), Telehealth) were trialled by one regional facility. This study aims to describe the economic- and service-related outcomes of these two methods of service delivery. METHODS: A retrospective audit was conducted where two nine-week time periods were selected for each service delivery model. Outcomes of interests include patient demographics and case-mix, service utilisation, clinical actions, adverse events and costs. Net financial position for both models was calculated based upon costs incurred and revenue generated by service activity. RESULTS: A total of 33 appointment slots were recorded for each service delivery model. Patient case-mix was variable, where the Telehealth model predominately involved patients with musculoskeletal spinal conditions managed from a neurosurgical waiting list. Appointment slot utilisation and pattern of referral for further investigations were similar between models. No safety incidents occurred in either service delivery model. An estimated cost-savings of 13% for the Telehealth model could be achieved when compared to the FIFO model. DISCUSSION: Telehealth is a safe, efficient and viable option when compared to a traditional in-person outreach service, while providing cost-savings. Telehealth should be seen as a service delivery medium in which sustainable recruitment of advanced-practice physiotherapists to regional and rural healthcare facilities can be achieved.


Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Musculoskeletal Diseases/therapy , Physical Therapy Modalities , Telemedicine , Adult , Ambulatory Care Facilities , Appointments and Schedules , Delivery of Health Care/economics , Delivery of Health Care/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Medical Audit , Middle Aged , Models, Theoretical , Musculoskeletal Diseases/economics , Physical Therapy Modalities/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/methods , Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine/economics , Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine/methods , Queensland , Retrospective Studies , Telemedicine/economics , Telemedicine/methods
13.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 11: 14, 2010 Jan 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20096136

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Manual Therapy applied to patients with non specific neck pain has been investigated several times. In the Netherlands, manual therapy as applied according to the Utrecht School of Manual Therapy (MTU) has not been the subject of a randomized controlled trial. MTU differs in diagnoses and treatment from other forms of manual therapy. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a single blind randomized controlled trial in patients with sub-acute and chronic non specific neck pain. Patients with neck complaints existing for two weeks (minimum) till one year (maximum) will participate in the trial. 180 participants will be recruited in thirteen primary health care centres in the Netherlands.The experimental group will be treated with MTU during a six week period. The control group will be treated with physical therapy (standard care, mainly active exercise therapy), also for a period of six weeks.Primary outcomes are Global Perceived Effect (GPE) and functional status (Neck Disability Index (NDI-DV)). Secondary outcomes are neck pain (Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)), Eurocol, costs and quality of life (SF36). DISCUSSION: This paper presents details on the rationale of MTU, design, methods and operational aspects of the trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00713843.


Subject(s)
Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Musculoskeletal Manipulations/methods , Neck Pain/therapy , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/methods , Physical Therapy Specialty/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Clinical Protocols , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Disability Evaluation , Exercise Therapy/economics , Exercise Therapy/methods , Exercise Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Musculoskeletal Manipulations/economics , Musculoskeletal Manipulations/statistics & numerical data , Neck Pain/economics , Netherlands , Pain Measurement , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/statistics & numerical data , Quality Assurance, Health Care/methods , Quality of Life , Research Design , Single-Blind Method , Young Adult
15.
Caring ; 28(2): 14-8, 2009 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19953859

ABSTRACT

Medicare Home Health nears the completion of a decade since the reforms prompted by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 were installed. Moving forward, we are confronted by the many challenges the future presents that will undoubtedly alter our care mission. The obvious need for clinical advancement, quality outcomes, and financial review will test all home care providers.


Subject(s)
Home Care Services/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Reimbursement Mechanisms/organization & administration , Disease Management , Health Care Reform , Humans , Joint Diseases/therapy , Medicare , United States
16.
Orthop Clin North Am ; 39(1): 49-53, vi-vii, 2008 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18061769

ABSTRACT

As the trend toward shrinking reimbursement for physician services continues, an internal physical therapy clinic providing high-quality care and a source of additional revenue presents an attractive opportunity. Internalization of physical therapy services within the clinic as either an off-site or on-site entity can assure patient access to the highest quality of rehabilitation services under the group's supervision and direction. It will contribute positively to creating patient loyalty to and confidence in their physician and physical therapist. This article discusses the issues that are important to address in creating a physician-owned physical therapy department.


Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care Facilities/organization & administration , Orthopedics/organization & administration , Ownership , Physical Therapy Specialty/organization & administration , Practice Management, Medical , Ambulatory Care Facilities/economics , Capital Expenditures , Facility Design and Construction , Humans , Orthopedics/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics
18.
Ortop Traumatol Rehabil ; 10(6): 537-46, 2008.
Article in English, Polish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19153542

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common causes of pain, physical disability and marked impairment of patients' physical fitness and mobility. Insufficient funding for health care contributes to prolonged waiting times for total hip replacement (THR) surgery, which has been proven to be the only effective treatment for OA. Average waiting time in Poland is estimated at 2-2.5 years. Objective. To carry out a retrospective comparative analysis of the cost of THR surgery vs. conservative treatment for OA in a variety of sociomedical aspects while patients are awaiting THR. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two groups of patients were compared. Group I consisted of 77 patients awaiting THR and treated with physical therapy and drugs. Group II consisted of 91 patients who underwent THR. Evaluations and comparisons were based on a modified WOMAC index, the SF-8 survey and estimates of pharmacological, procedural and orthopaedic equipment expenditures. RESULTS: Prolonged waiting times and the associated conservative treatment costs, including drugs, physical therapy, sanatorium, orthopaedic equipment, transport, sickness benefits and costs of pharmacological treatment of complications, were shown to be approximately twice higher compared to the cost of surgical treatment. Apart from financial costs, other significant aspects should also be noted, such as deterioration of the patient's life quality and psychosocial health, and prolonged anguish. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacological treatment, rehabilitation, physical therapy and other methods appear to be inefficient in patients with hip OA awaiting THR and their costs are twice as high. Additionally, NSAID drugs produce GI ulcers in 25% of the patients. Psychosocial problems are also common for these patients. Surgical treatment produces a radical improvement of the quality of life and ameliorates psychosocial problems. Therefore, hip OA costs can only be reduced by shorter waiting times, which can be accomplished through an increase in funding resulting in wider access to the procedure.


Subject(s)
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip/economics , Health Care Costs , Osteoarthritis, Hip/economics , Osteoarthritis, Hip/therapy , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/adverse effects , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/economics , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/therapeutic use , Cost Control , Costs and Cost Analysis , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Orthopedic Equipment/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Poland , Quality of Life , Retrospective Studies , Stomach Ulcer/chemically induced , Waiting Lists
19.
Physiother Theory Pract ; 34(9): 705-713, 2018 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29308961

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Student-led physiotherapy clinics are a valuable means for providing clinical education opportunities for student learning and providing cost-effective services to the public. Understanding patient satisfaction within the student-led physiotherapy clinic setting is important to inform organizational, educational, and clinical processes that aim to balance both student learning experiences and quality patient care. DESIGN: A cross-sectional qualitative design using semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients from three different university student-led physiotherapy clinics were interviewed. Five major themes were associated with patient satisfaction, style of supervision, student-supervisor relationship, quality of physiotherapy care, student qualities and cost, and location of the service. CONCLUSION: The results emphasize the importance placed by patients on effective communication, as well as the relationship between the supervisor and student overseeing their care. The findings highlight the influence of both the student and supervisor on patient satisfaction and provide insight into the style of student supervision from the perspective of the patient.


Subject(s)
Patient Satisfaction , Physical Therapists/education , Physical Therapy Modalities/education , Physical Therapy Specialty/education , Student Run Clinic , Students, Health Occupations , Adult , Aged , Attitude of Health Personnel , Clinical Competence , Cross-Sectional Studies , Faculty , Female , Health Care Costs , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Male , Middle Aged , Physical Therapy Modalities/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Professional-Patient Relations , Qualitative Research , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Student Run Clinic/economics , Young Adult
20.
J Allied Health ; 47(1): 72-74, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29504023

ABSTRACT

Although the literature has well recognized the effectiveness of physical therapy for treating musculoskeletal injuries, reimbursement is evolving towards value-based or alternative payment models and away from procedure orientated, fee-for-service in the outpatient setting. Alternative models include cased-based clinics, pay-for-performance, out-of-network services, accountable care organizations, and concierge practices. There is the possibility that alternative payment models could produce different and even superior patient outcomes. Physical therapists should be alert to this possibility, and research is warranted in this area to conclude if outcomes in patient care are related to method of reimbursement.


Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care Facilities/organization & administration , Physical Therapy Specialty/organization & administration , Reimbursement Mechanisms/organization & administration , Ambulatory Care Facilities/economics , Ambulatory Care Facilities/standards , Humans , Managed Care Programs/organization & administration , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Physical Therapy Specialty/economics , Physical Therapy Specialty/standards , Reimbursement Mechanisms/economics , Reimbursement, Incentive , Socioeconomic Factors , Workers' Compensation/organization & administration
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL