Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
First Contact Physiotherapy: An evaluation of clinical effectiveness and costs.
Walsh, Nicola; Halls, Serena; Thomas, Rachel; Berry, Alice; Liddiard, Cathy; Cupples, Margaret Elizabeth; Gage, Heather; Jackson, Dan; Cramp, Fiona; Stott, Hannah; Kersten, Paula; Jagosh, Justin; Foster, Dave; Williams, Peter.
Afiliación
  • Halls S; University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom.
  • Thomas R; University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom.
  • Berry A; University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom.
  • Liddiard C; University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom.
  • Cupples ME; Queen's University Belfast EPS, Belfast, United Kingdom.
  • Gage H; University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom.
  • Jackson D; University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom.
  • Cramp F; University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom.
  • Stott H; University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom.
  • Kersten P; Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, United Kingdom.
  • Jagosh J; Centre for Advancement in Realist Evaluation and Synthesis, Vancouver, United Kingdom.
  • Foster D; Patient Research Partner, Bristol, United Kingdom.
  • Williams P; University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom.
Br J Gen Pract ; 2024 Mar 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38429110
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

First Contact Physiotherapy Practitioners (FCPPs) are embedded within general practice, providing expert assessment, diagnosis and management plans for patients with musculoskeletal disorders (MSKDs), without the prior need for GP consultation.

AIM:

To determine the clinical effectiveness and costs of FCPP-led compared to GP-led models of care. DESIGN AND

SETTING:

Multiple site case study design. UK GP practices.

METHOD:

General Practice sites were recruited representing three models 1. GP-led care; 2. FCPPs who could not prescribe/inject (Standard (St)); 3. FCPPs who could prescribe/inject (Additional Qualifications (AQ)). Patient participants from each site completed clinical outcome data at baseline, 3 and 6 months. The primary outcome was the SF-36v.2 Physical Component Score (PCS). Healthcare usage was collected for 6 months.

RESULTS:

N=426 adults were recruited from 46 practices across the UK. Non-inferiority analysis showed no significant difference in physical function (SF36-PCS) across all three arms at 6 months (p=0.999). At 3 months a significant difference in numbers improving was seen between arms 54.7% GP consultees; 72.4% FCPP-St, 66.4% FCPP-AQ; (p=0.037). No safety issues were identified. Following initial consultation, a greater proportion of patients received medication (including opioids) in the GP-led arm (44.7%) compared with FCPP-St (17.5%) and FCPP-AQ (22.8%); (p<0.001). NHS costs (initial consultation and over 6 months follow up) were significantly higher in the GP-led model (median £105.50) vs FCPP-St (£41) and FCPP-AQ (£44); (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION:

FCPP led models provide safe, clinically effective and cost-beneficial management for patients with MSKDs in general practice and reduced opioid use in this cohort.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Br J Gen Pract Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Br J Gen Pract Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article