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.

Consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the OMERACT Core Outcome Set for shared decision making interventions in rheumatology trials.

OBJECTIVE: To gain consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core domain set for rheumatology trials evaluating shared decision making (SDM) interventions. METHODS: Following the OMERACT Handbook methods, our Working Group (WG), comprised of 90 members, including 17 patient research partners (PRPs) and 73 clinicians and researchers, had six virtual meetings in addition to email exchanges to develop draft definitions and descriptions. The WG then conducted an international survey of its members to gain consensus on the definitions and descriptions. Finally, the WG members had virtual meetings and e-mail exchanges to review survey results and finalize names, definitions and descriptions of the domains. RESULTS: WG members contributed to developing the definitions. Fifty-two members representing four continents and 13 countries completed the survey, including 15 PRPs, 33 clinicians and 37 researchers. PRPs and clinicians/researchers agreed with all definitions and descriptions with agreements ranging from 87% to 100%. Respondents suggested wording changes to the names, definitions and descriptions to better reflect the domains. Discussions led to further simplification and clarification to address common questions/concerns about the domains. CONCLUSION: Our WG reached consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the core domain set for rheumatology trials of SDM interventions. This step is crucial to understand each domain and provides the foundation to identify instruments to measure each domain for inclusion in the Core Outcome Measurement Set. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The current study provides consensus-based definitions and descriptions for the domains of the OMERACT core domain set for shared decision making interventions from patients/caregivers, clinicians and researchers. This is a crucial step to understand each domain and provides the foundation to identify instruments to measure each domain for inclusion in the Core Outcome Measurement Set for trials of SDM interventions.

Relevance and use of health policy, health systems and health services research for strengthening rehabilitation in real-life settings: methodological considerations.

Research on health policy, systems, and services (HPSSR) has seen significant growth in recent decades and received increasing attention in the field of rehabilitation. This growth is driven by the imperative to effectively address real-life challenges in complex healthcare settings. A recent resolution on 'Strengthening rehabilitation in health systems' adopted by the World Health Assembly emphasizes the need to support societal health goals related to rehabilitation, particularly to promote high-quality rehabilitation research, including HPSSR. This conceptual paper, discussed with the participants in the 5th Cochrane Rehabilitation Methodological Meeting held in Milan on September 2023, outlines study designs at diverse levels at which HPSSR studies can be conducted: the macro, meso, and micro levels. It categorizes research questions into four types: those framed from the perspective of policies, healthcare delivery organizations or systems, defined patient or provider populations, and important data sources or research methods. Illustrative examples of appropriate methodologies are provided for each type of research question, demonstrating the potential of HPSSR in shaping policies, improving healthcare delivery, and addressing patient and provider perspectives. The paper concludes by discussing the applicability, usefulness, and implementation of HPSSR findings, and the importance of knowledge translation strategies, drawing insights from implementation science. The goal is to facilitate the integration of research findings into everyday clinical practice to bridge the gap between research and practice in rehabilitation.

Motivation to participate and attrition factors in a COVID-19 biobank: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The Biobanque québécoise de la COVID-19 (Quebec Biobank for COVID-19, or BQC19) is a provincial initiative that aims to manage the longitudinal collection, storage, and sharing of biological samples and clinical data related to COVID-19. During the study, BQC19 investigators reported a high loss-to-follow-up rate. The current study aimed to explore motivational and attrition factors from the perspective of BQC19 participants and health care and research professionals. METHODS: This was an inductive exploratory qualitative study. Using a theoretical sampling approach, a sample of BQC19 participants and professionals were invited to participate via semi-structured interviews. Topics included motivations to participate; participants' fears, doubts, and barriers to participation; and professionals' experiences with biobanking during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with BQC19 participants (n = 23) and professionals (n = 17) from 8 clinical data collection sites. Motivations included the contribution to science and society in crisis, self-worth, and interactions with medical professionals. Reasons for attrition included logistical barriers, negative attitudes about public health measures or genomic studies, fear of clinical settings, and a desire to move on from COVID-19. Motivations and barriers seemed to evolve over time and with COVID-19 trends and surges. Certain situations were associated with attrition, such as when patients experienced indirect verbal consent during hospitalization. Barriers related to human and material resources and containment/prevention measures limited the ability of research teams to recruit and retain participants, especially in the ever-evolving context of crisis. CONCLUSION: The pandemic setting impacted participation and attrition, either by influencing participants' motivations and barriers or by affecting research teams' ability to recruit and retain participants. Longitudinal and/or biobanking studies in a public health crisis setting should consider these factors to limit attrition.

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.

"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.

Understanding How Post-COVID-19 Condition Affects Adults and Health Care Systems.

Importance: Post-COVID-19 condition (PCC), also known as long COVID, encompasses the range of symptoms and sequelae that affect many people with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Understanding the functional, health, and economic effects of PCC is important in determining how health care systems may optimally deliver care to individuals with PCC. Observations: A rapid review of the literature showed that PCC and the effects of hospitalization for severe and critical illness may limit a person's ability to perform day-to-day activities and employment, increase their risk of incident health conditions and use of primary and short-term health care services, and have a negative association with household financial stability. Care pathways that integrate primary care, rehabilitation services, and specialized assessment clinics are being developed to support the health care needs of people with PCC. However, comparative studies to determine optimal care models based on their effectiveness and costs remain limited. The effects of PCC are likely to have large-scale associations with health systems and economies and will require substantial investment in research, clinical care, and health policy to mitigate these effects. Conclusions and Relevance: An accurate understanding of additional health care and economic needs at the individual and health system levels is critical to informing health care resource and policy planning, including identification of optimal care pathways to support people affected by PCC.

"I'd like more options!": Interviews to explore young people and family decision-making needs for pain management in juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is a common pediatric rheumatic condition and is associated with symptoms such as joint pain that can negatively impact health-related quality of life. To effectively manage pain in JIA, young people, their families, and health care providers (HCPs) should be supported to discuss pain management options and make a shared decision. However, pain is often under-recognized, and pain management discussions are not optimal. No studies have explored decision-making needs for pain management in JIA using a shared decision making (SDM) model. We sought to explore families' decision-making needs with respect to pain management among young people with JIA, parents/caregivers, and HCPs. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured virtual or face-to-face individual interviews with young people with JIA 8-18 years of age, parents/caregivers and HCPs using a qualitative descriptive study design. We recruited participants online across Canada and the United States, from a hospital and from a quality improvement network. We used interview guides based on the Ottawa Decision Support Framework to assess decision-making needs. We audiotaped, transcribed verbatim and analyzed interviews using thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 12 young people (n = 6 children and n = 6 adolescents), 13 parents/caregivers and 11 HCPs participated in interviews. Pediatric HCPs were comprised of rheumatologists (n = 4), physical therapists (n = 3), rheumatology nurses (n = 2) and occupational therapists (n = 2). The following themes were identified: (1) need to assess pain in an accurate manner; (2) need to address pain in pediatric rheumatology consultations; (3) need for information on pain management options, especially nonpharmacological approaches; (4) importance of effectiveness, safety and ease of use of treatments; (5) need to discuss young people/families' values and preferences for pain management options; and the (6) need for decision support. Themes were similar for young people, parents/caregivers and HCPs, although their respective importance varied. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest a need for evidence-based information and communication about pain management options, which would be addressed by decision support interventions and HCP training in pain and SDM. Work is underway to develop such interventions and implement them into practice to improve pain management in JIA and in turn lead to better health outcomes.

Prognostic factors specific to work-related musculoskeletal disorders: An overview of recent systematic reviews.

PURPOSE: Work-related injuries affect a considerable number of people each year and represent a significant burden for society. To reduce this burden, optimizing rehabilitation care by integrating prognostic factors (PF) into the clinical decision-making process is a promising way to improve clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to identify PF specific to work-related musculoskeletal disorders. METHODS: We performed an overview of systematic reviews reporting on PF that had the following outcomes of interest: Return to work, pain, disability, functional status, or poor outcomes. Each extracted PF was categorized according to its level of evidence (grade A or B) and whether it was modifiable or not. The risk of bias of each study was assessed with the ROBIS tool. RESULTS: We retrieved 757 citations from 3 databases. After removing 307 duplicates, 450 records were screened, and 20 studies were retained. We extracted a total of 20 PF with a Grade A recommendation, where 7 were deemed modifiable, 11 non-modifiable and 2 were index test. For example, return to work expectations, previous sick leave, delay in referral and pain intensity were found to be predictors of return-to-work outcomes. We also identified 17 PF with a Grade B recommendation, where 11 were deemed modifiable. For example, poor general health, negative recovery expectations, coping and fear-avoidance beliefs, pain severity, and particularly physical work were found to predict return to work outcomes. CONCLUSION: We found numerous modifiable PFs that can help clinicians personalize their treatment plan beyond diagnostic-related information for work-related musculoskeletal disorders.

Decisional needs assessment for patient-centred pain care in Canada: the DECIDE-PAIN study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The 2021 Action Plan for Pain from the Canadian Pain Task Force advocates for patient-centred pain care at all levels of healthcare across provinces. Shared decision-making is the crux of patient-centred care. Implementing the action plan will require innovative shared decision-making interventions, specifically following the disruption of chronic pain care during the COVID-19 pandemic. The first step in this endeavour is to assess current decisional needs (ie, decisions most important to them) of Canadians with chronic pain across their care pathways. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: DesignGrounded in patient-oriented research approaches, we will perform an online population-based survey across the ten Canadian provinces. We will report methods and data following the CROSS reporting guidelines.SamplingThe Léger Marketing company will administer the online population-based survey to its representative panel of 500 000 Canadians to recruit 1646 adults (age ≥18 years old) with chronic pain according to the definition by the International Association for the Study of Pain (eg, pain ≥12 weeks). ContentBased on the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, the self-administered survey has been codesigned with patients and contain six core domains: (1) healthcare services, consultation and postpandemic needs, (2) difficult decisions experienced, (3) decisional conflict, (4) decisional regret, (5) decisional needs and (6) sociodemographic characteristics. We will use several strategies such as random sampling to improve survey quality. AnalysisWe will perform descriptive statistical analysis. We will identify factors associated with clinically significant decisional conflict and decision regret using multivariate analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics was approved by the Research Ethics Board at the Research Centre of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke (project #2022-4645). We will codesign knowledge mobilisation products with research patient partners (eg, graphical summaries and videos). Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journals and national and international conferences to inform the development of innovative shared decision-making interventions for Canadians with chronic pain.

Six Externally Validated Prognostic Models Have Potential Clinical Value to Predict Patient Health Outcomes in the Rehabilitation of Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to identify and appraise externally validated prognostic models to predict a patient's health outcomes relevant to physical rehabilitation of musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions. METHODS: We systematically reviewed 8 databases and reported our findings according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis 2020. An information specialist designed a search strategy to identify externally validated prognostic models for MSK conditions. Paired reviewers independently screened the title, abstract, and full text and conducted data extraction. We extracted characteristics of included studies (eg, country and study design), prognostic models (eg, performance measures and type of model) and predicted clinical outcomes (eg, pain and disability). We assessed the risk of bias and concerns of applicability using the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool. We proposed and used a 5-step method to determine which prognostic models were clinically valuable. RESULTS: We found 4896 citations, read 300 full-text articles, and included 46 papers (37 distinct models). Prognostic models were externally validated for the spine, upper limb, lower limb conditions, and MSK trauma, injuries, and pain. All studies presented a high risk of bias. Half of the models showed low concerns for applicability. Reporting of calibration and discrimination performance measures was often lacking. We found 6 externally validated models with adequate measures, which could be deemed clinically valuable [ie, (1) STart Back Screening Tool, (2) Wallis Occupational Rehabilitation RisK model, (3) Da Silva model, (4) PICKUP model, (5) Schellingerhout rule, and (6) Keene model]. Despite having a high risk of bias, which is mostly explained by the very conservative properties of the PROBAST tool, the 6 models remain clinically relevant. CONCLUSION: We found 6 externally validated prognostic models developed to predict patients' health outcomes that were clinically relevant to the physical rehabilitation of MSK conditions. IMPACT: Our results provide clinicians with externally validated prognostic models to help them better predict patients' clinical outcomes and facilitate personalized treatment plans. Incorporating clinically valuable prognostic models could inherently improve the value of care provided by physical therapists.

Cardiovascular Considerations in the Management of People With Suspected Long COVID.

Approximately 15% of adult Canadians with SARS-CoV-2 infection develop lingering symptoms beyond 12 weeks after acute infection, known as post-COVID condition or long COVID. Some of the commonly reported long COVID cardiovascular symptoms include fatigue, shortness of breath, chest pain, and palpitations. Suspected long-term cardiovascular complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection might present as a constellation of symptoms that can be challenging for clinicians to diagnose and treat. When assessing patients with these symptoms, clinicians need to keep in mind myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome, postexertional malaise and postexertional symptom exacerbation, dysautonomia with cardiac manifestations such as inappropriate sinus tachycardia, and postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, and occasionally mast cell activation syndrome. In this review we summarize the globally evolving evidence around management of cardiac sequelae of long COVID. In addition, we include a Canadian perspective, consisting of a panel of expert opinions from people with lived experience and experienced clinicians across Canada who have been involved in management of long COVID. The objective of this review is to offer some practical guidance to cardiologists and generalist clinicians regarding diagnostic and treatment approaches for adult patients with suspected long COVID who continue to experience unexplained cardiac symptoms.

Trajectories of health-related quality of life and their predictors in adult COVID-19 survivors: A longitudinal analysis of the Biobanque Québécoise de la COVID-19 (BQC-19).

PURPOSE: A significant number of people will experience prolonged symptoms after COVID-19 infection that will greatly impact functional capacity and quality of life. The aim of this study was to identify trajectories of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and their predictors among adults diagnosed with COVID-19. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of an ongoing prospective cohort study (BQC-19) including adults (≥18y) recruited from April 2020 to March 2022. Our primary outcome is HRQOL using the EQ-5D-5L scale. Sociodemographic, acute disease severity, vaccination status, fatigue, and functional status at onset of the disease were considered as potential predictors. The latent class mixed model was used to identify the trajectories over an 18-month period in the cohort as a whole, as well as in the inpatient and outpatient subgroups. Multivariable and univariable regressions models were undertaken to detect predictors of decline. RESULTS: 2163 participants were included. Thirteen percent of the outpatient subgroup (2 classes) and 28% in the inpatient subgroup (3 classes) experienced a more significant decline in HRQOL over time than the rest of the participants. Among all patients, age, sex, disease severity and fatigue, measured on the first assessment visit or on the first day after hospital admission (multivariable models), were identified as the most important predictors of HRQOL decline. Each unit increase in the SARC-F and CFS scores increase the likelihood of belonging to the declining trajectory (univariable models). CONCLUSION: Although to different degrees, similar factors explain the decline in HRQOL over time among the overall population, people who have been hospitalized or not. Clinical functional capacity scales could help to determine the risk of HRQOL decline.

Optimising management of low back pain through the pain and disability drivers management model: Findings from a pilot cluster nonrandomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Low back pain (LBP) remains the leading cause of disability. The Low Back Pain and Disability Drivers Management (PDDM) model aims to identify the domains driving pain and disability to guide clinical decisions. The objectives of this study were to determine the feasibility of conducting a pragmatic controlled trial of the PDDM model and to explore its effectiveness compared to clinical practice guidelines' recommendations for LBP management. METHODS: A pilot cluster nonrandomised controlled trial. Participants included physiotherapists and their patients aged 18 years or older presenting with a primary complaint of LBP. Primary outcomes were the feasibility of the trial design. Secondary exploratory analyses were conducted on LBP-related outcomes such as pain severity and interference at 12-week follow-up. RESULTS: Feasibility of study procedures were confirmed, recruitment exceeded our target number of participants, and the eligibility criteria were deemed suitable. Lost to follow-up at 12 weeks was higher than expected (43.0%) and physiotherapists' compliance rates to the study protocol was lower than our predefined threshold (75.0% vs. 57.5%). A total of 44 physiotherapists and 91 patients were recruited. Recommendations for a larger scale trial were formulated. The PDDM model group demonstrated slightly better improvements in all clinical outcome measures compared to the control group at 12 weeks. CONCLUSION: The findings support the feasibility of conducting such trial contingent upon a few recommendations to foster proper future planning to determine the effectiveness of the PDDM model. Our results provide preliminary evidence of the PDDM model effectiveness to optimise LBP management. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrial.gov, NCT04893369.

Scoping review of rehabilitation care models for post COVID-19 condition.

Objective: To systematically map the current evidence about the characteristics of health systems, providers and patients to design rehabilitation care for post coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) condition. Methods: We conducted a scoping review by searching the databases: MEDLINE®, Embase®, Web of Science, Cochrane COVID-19 Registry and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception to 22 April 2022. The search strategy included terms related to (i) post COVID-19 condition and other currently known terminologies; (ii) care models and pathways; and (iii) rehabilitation. We applied no language or study design restrictions. Two pairs of researchers independently screened title, abstracts and full-text articles and extracted data. We charted the evidence according to five topics: (i) care model components and functions; (ii) safe delivery of rehabilitation; (iii) referral principles; (iv) service delivery settings; and (v) health-care professionals. Findings: We screened 13 753 titles and abstracts, read 154 full-text articles, and included 37 articles. The current evidence is conceptual and expert based. Care model components included multidisciplinary teams, continuity or coordination of care, people-centred care and shared decision-making between clinicians and patients. Care model functions included standardized symptoms assessment, telehealth and virtual care and follow-up system. Rehabilitation services were integrated at all levels of a health system from primary care to tertiary hospital-based care. Health-care workers delivering services within a multidisciplinary team included mostly physiotherapists, occupational therapists and psychologists. Conclusion: Key policy messages include implementing a multilevel and multiprofessional model; leveraging country health systems' strengths and learning from other conditions; financing rehabilitation research providing standardized outcomes; and guidance to increase patient safety.

Development and content validity of a rating scale for the pain and disability drivers management model.

BACKGROUND: Establishing the biopsychosocial profile of patients with low back pain (LBP) is essential to personalized care. The Pain and Disability Drivers Management model (PDDM) has been suggested as a useful framework to help clinicians establish this biopsychosocial profile. Yet, there is no tool to facilitate its integration into clinical practice. Thus, the aim of this study is to develop a rating scale and validate its content, to rapidly establish the patient's biopsychosocial profile, based on the five domains of the PDDM. METHODS: The tool was developed in accordance with the principles of the COSMIN methodology. We conducted three steps: 1) item generation from a comprehensive review, 2) refinement of the scale with clinicians' feedback, and 3) statistical analyses to assess content validity. To validate the item assessing with Likert scales, we performed Item level-Content Validity Index (I-CVI) analyses on three criteria (clarity, presentation and clinical applicability) with an a priori threshold of > 0.78. We conducted Average-Content Validity Index (Ave-CVI) analyses to validate the overall scale with a threshold of > 0.9. RESULTS: In accordance with the PDDM, we developed a 5-item rating scale (1 per domain) with 4 score options. We selected clinical instruments to screen for the presence or absence of problematic issues within each category of the 5 domains. Forty-two participants provided feedback to refine the scale's clarity, presentation, and clinical applicability. The statistical analysis of the latest version presented I-CVI above the threshold for each item (I-CVI ranged between 0.94 and 1). Analysis of the overall scale supported its validation (Ave-CVI = 0.96 [0.93;0.98]). CONCLUSION: From the 51 biopsychosocial elements contained within the 5 domains of the PDDM, we developed a rating scale that allows to rapidly screen for problematic issues within each category of the PDDM's 5 domains. Involving clinicians in the process allowed us to validate the content of the first scale to establish the patient's biopsychosocial profile for people with low back pain. Future steps will be necessary to continue the psychometric properties analysis of this rating scale.

Factors Associated With Specialists' Intention to Adopt New Behaviors After Taking Web-Based Continuing Professional Development Courses: Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Web-based continuing professional development (CPD) is a convenient and low-cost way for physicians to update their knowledge. However, little is known about the factors that influence their intention to put this new knowledge into practice. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify sociocognitive factors associated with physicians' intention to adopt new behaviors as well as indications of Bloom's learning levels following their participation in 5 web-based CPD courses. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of specialist physicians who had completed 1 of 5 web-based CPD courses offered by the Federation of Medical Specialists of Quebec. The participants then completed CPD-Reaction, a questionnaire based on Godin's integrated model for health professional behavior change and with evidence of validity that measures behavioral intention (dependent variable) and psychosocial factors influencing intention (n=4). We also assessed variables related to sociodemographics (n=5), course content (n=9), and course format (eg, graphic features and duration) (n=8). Content variables were derived from CanMEDS competencies, Bloom's learning levels, and Godin's integrated model. We conducted ANOVA single-factor analysis, calculated the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and performed bivariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: A total of 400 physicians participated in the courses (range: 38-135 physicians per course). Average age was 50 (SD 12) years; 56% (n=223) were female, and 44% (n=177) were male. Among the 259 who completed CPD-Reaction, behavioral intention scores ranged from 5.37 (SD 1.17) to 6.60 (SD 0.88) out of 7 and differed significantly from one course to another (P<.001). The ICC indicated that 17% of the total variation in the outcome of interest, the behavioral intention of physicians, could be explained at the level of the CPD course (ICC=0.17). In bivariate analyses, social influences (P<.001), beliefs about capabilities (P<.001), moral norm (P<.001), beliefs about consequences (P<.001), and psychomotor learning (P=.04) were significantly correlated with physicians' intention to adopt new behaviors. Multivariate analysis showed the same factors, except for social influences and psychomotor learning, as significantly correlated with intention. CONCLUSIONS: We observed average to high behavioral intention scores after all 5 web-based courses, with some variations by course taken. Factors affecting physicians' intention were beliefs about their capabilities and about the consequences of adopting new clinical behaviors, as well as doubts about whether the new behavior aligned with their moral values. Our results will inform design of future web-based CPD courses to ensure they contribute to clinical behavior change.

Use of the CPD-REACTION Questionnaire to Evaluate Continuing Professional Development Activities for Health Professionals: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Continuing professional development (CPD) is essential for physicians to maintain and enhance their knowledge, competence, skills, and performance. Web-based CPD plays an essential role. However, validated theory-informed measures of their impact are lacking. The CPD-REACTION questionnaire is a validated theory-informed tool that evaluates the impact of CPD activities on clinicians' behavioral intentions. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to review the use of the CPD-REACTION questionnaire, which measures the impact of CPD activities on health professionals' intentions to change clinical behavior. We examined CPD activity characteristics, ranges of intention, mean scores, score distributions, and psychometric properties. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review informed by the Cochrane review methodology. We searched 8 databases from January 1, 2014, to April 20, 2021. Gray literature was identified using Google Scholar and Research Gate. Eligibility criteria included all health care professionals, any study design, and participants' completion of the CPD-REACTION questionnaire either before, after, or before and after a CPD activity. Study selection, data extraction, and study quality evaluation were independently performed by 2 reviewers. We extracted data on characteristics of studies, the CPD activity (eg, targeted clinical behavior and format), and CPD-REACTION use. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to evaluate the methodological quality of the studies. Data extracted were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the Student t test (2-tailed) for bivariate analysis. The results are presented as a narrative synthesis reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. RESULTS: Overall, 65 citations were eligible and referred to 52 primary studies. The number of primary studies reporting the use of CPD-REACTION has increased continuously since 2014 from 1 to 16 publications per year (2021). It is available in English, French, Spanish, and Dutch. Most of the studies were conducted in Canada (30/52, 58%). Furthermore, 40 different clinical behaviors were identified. The most common CPD format was e-learning (34/52, 65%). The original version of the CPD-REACTION questionnaire was used in 31 of 52 studies, and an adapted version in 18 of 52 studies. In addition, 31% (16/52) of the studies measured both the pre- and postintervention scores. In 22 studies, CPD providers were university-based. Most studies targeted interprofessional groups of health professionals (31/52, 60%). CONCLUSIONS: The use of CPD-REACTION has increased rapidly and across a wide range of clinical behaviors and formats, including a web-based format. Further research should investigate the most effective way to adapt the CPD-REACTION questionnaire to a variety of clinical behaviors and contexts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018116492; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=116492.