Digital physiotherapy assessment vs conventional face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review aimed to assess the certainty of evidence for digital versus conventional, face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of musculoskeletal disorders, concerning validity, reliability, feasibility, patient satisfaction, physiotherapist satisfaction, adverse events, clinical management, and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: Eligibility criteria: Original studies comparing digital physiotherapy assessment with face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of musculoskeletal disorders. Systematic database searches were performed in May 2021, and updated in May 2022, in Medline, Cochrane Library, Cinahl, AMED, and PEDro. Risk of bias and applicability of the included studies were appraised using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool and the Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies tool. Included studies were synthesised narratively. Certainty of evidence was evaluated for each assessment component using GRADE. RESULTS: Ten repeated-measures studies were included, involving 193 participants aged 23-62 years. Reported validity of digital physiotherapy assessment ranged from moderate/acceptable to almost perfect/excellent for clinical tests, range of motion, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), pain, neck posture, and management decisions. Reported validity for assessing spinal posture varied and was for clinical observations unacceptably low. Reported validity and reliability for digital diagnosis ranged from moderate to almost perfect for exact+similar agreement, but was considerably lower when constrained to exact agreement. Reported reliability was excellent for digital assessment of clinical tests, range of motion, pain, neck posture, and PROMs. Certainty of evidence varied from very low to high, with PROMs and pain assessment obtaining the highest certainty. Patients were satisfied with their digital assessment, but did not perceive it as good as face-to-face assessment. DISCUSSION: Evidence ranging from very low to high certainty suggests that validity and reliability of digital physiotherapy assessments are acceptable to excellent for several assessment components. Digital physiotherapy assessment may be a viable alternative to face-to-face assessment for patients who are likely to benefit from the accessibility and convenience of remote access. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The review was registered in the PROSPERO database, CRD42021277624.

"Take me seriously and do something!" - a qualitative study exploring patients' perceptions and expectations of an upcoming orthopaedic consultation.

BACKGROUND: Patients' perceptions of care is an important factor in evaluation of health care, in quality assessment, and in improvement efforts. Expectations of assessments or procedures such as surgery have been found to be related to perceptions of outcome as well as satisfaction, and are therefore of interest to both clinicians and researchers. Increased understanding of these patient views is important so that orthopaedic assessments, regardless of who performs them, can be further developed and patient-centred to better meet patients' needs. The purpose of this study was therefore to explore patients' perceptions and expectations of an upcoming orthopaedic consultation. METHODS: This was an explorative qualitative study with an inductive approach. Thirteen patients who were referred for orthopaedic consultation were included using a purposeful sampling strategy. Patients participated in individual, semi-structured interviews that were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed with qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The participants' expressed perceptions and expectations of the upcoming orthopaedic surgeon consultation were classified into 5 categories: Hoping for action, Meeting an expert, A respectful meeting, Participating in the consultation, and A belief that hard facts make evidence. Across the categories, an overarching theme was formulated: Take me seriously and do something! The participants emphasised a desire to be taken seriously and for something to happen, both during the consultation itself and as a result of the orthopaedic consultation. They described a trust in the expertise of the orthopaedic surgeon and stressed the importance of the surgeon's attitude, but still expected to participate in the consultation as well as in the decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS: The study findings illuminate aspects that are important for patients in an orthopaedic consultation. The descriptions of patients' perceptions and expectations can serve to improve patient-clinician relationships as well as to inform the development of new models of care, and a greater understanding of these aspects may improve the patient experience.

Perceived quality of physiotherapist-led orthopaedic triage compared with standard practice in primary care: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Physiotherapist-led orthopaedic triage, where physiotherapists diagnose and determine management plans, aims to enhance effectiveness and provide the best care. However, scientific evidence for the effectiveness of this model of care remains limited, and there are few studies reporting on patients' perceptions of the care provided. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patients' perceived quality of care in a physiotherapist-led orthopaedic triage in primary care, compared with standard practice. METHODS: In a randomised controlled trial, patients of working age referred for orthopaedic consultation at a primary healthcare clinic in Sweden received either physiotherapist-led triage (n = 102) or standard practice (orthopaedic surgeon assessment) (n = 101). Neither subjects nor clinicians were blinded. The questionnaire Quality from the Patient's Perspective (QPP) was used to evaluate perceived quality of care focusing on the caregivers' medical-technical competence and identity-orientated approach. Also, to what extent patients' expectations were met, and their intention to follow advice was evaluated. RESULTS: For this study, 163 patients (80 %) were analysed (physiotherapist-led triage (n = 83), standard practice (n = 80)). Participants perceived significantly higher quality of care with the triage than with the standard practice in regards to receiving best possible examination and treatment (medical-technical competence) (p < 0.001). This was also found in regards to receiving information about examination and treatment (p < 0.001), results (p < 0.001), and self-care (p < 0.001), the caregiver's understanding (p < 0.001), respect (p < 0.001) and commitment (p < 0.001) as well as the opportunity to participate in decision-making (p = 0.01) (identity-orientated approach). Participants in the physiotherapist-led triage group reported to a significantly higher extent that their expectations of the treatment were met (p < 0.001), as well as the intent to follow the advice and instructions received (p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: This paper reports on patients' perceptions of quality of care in a physiotherapist-led orthopaedic triage compared with standard practice. Patients in both groups reported that they perceived good quality of care, with the patients in the physiotherapist-led triage reporting significantly higher perceived quality of care than those in the standard practice group. This model of care seems to meet patients' expectations and result in a greater intention to follow advice and instructions for self-management. Our findings are in line with existing literature that this model of care provides an opportunity to shape patient-centered care that can improve access and offer care on the most appropriate level, with maintained good quality of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT02265172 . Registered 10 June 2014.

Physiotherapy triage assessment of patients referred for orthopaedic consultation - Long-term follow-up of health-related quality of life, pain-related disability and sick leave.

INTRODUCTION: The literature indicates that physiotherapy triage assessment can be efficient for patients referred for orthopaedic consultation, however long-term follow up of patient reported outcome measures are not available. AIM: To report a long-term evaluation of patient-reported health-related quality of life, pain-related disability, and sick leave after a physiotherapy triage assessment of patients referred for orthopaedic consultation compared with standard practice. METHODS: Patients referred for orthopaedic consultation (n = 208) were randomised to physiotherapy triage assessment or standard practice. The randomised cohort was analysed on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis. The patient reported outcome measures EuroQol VAS (self-reported health-state), EuroQol 5D-3L (EQ-5D) and Pain Disability Index (PDI) were assessed at baseline and after 3, 6 and 12 months. EQ VAS was analysed using a repeated measure ANOVA. PDI and EQ-5D were analysed using a marginal logistic regression model. Sick leave was analysed for the 12 months following consultation using a Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS: The patients rated a significantly better health-state at 3 after physiotherapy triage assessment [mean difference -5.7 (95% CI -11.1; -0.2); p = 0.04]. There were no other statistically significant differences in perceived health-related quality of life or pain related disability between the groups at any of the follow-ups, or sick leave. CONCLUSION: This study reports that the long-term follow up of the patient related outcome measures health-related quality of life, pain-related disability and sick leave after physiotherapy triage assessment did not differ from standard practice, indicating the possible benefits of implementation of this model of care.