scholarly journals Patient Satisfaction With Musculoskeletal Physical Therapy Care: A Systematic Review

2011 ◽  
Vol 91 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia M. Hush ◽  
Kirsten Cameron ◽  
Martin Mackey

Background Patient satisfaction is an important patient-centered health outcome. To date, no systematic review of the literature on patient satisfaction with musculoskeletal physical therapy care has been conducted. Purpose The purpose of this study was to systematically and critically review the literature to determine the degree of patient satisfaction with musculoskeletal physical therapy care and factors associated with satisfaction. Data Sources The databases CINAHL, MEDLINE, and EBM Reviews were searched from inception to September 2009. Study Selection Articles were included if the design was a clinical trial, observational study, survey, or qualitative study; patient satisfaction was evaluated; and the study related to the delivery of musculoskeletal physical therapy services conducted in an outpatient setting. The search located 3,790 citations. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Data Extraction Two authors extracted patient satisfaction data and details of each study. Data Synthesis A meta-analysis of patient satisfaction data from 7 studies was conducted. The pooled estimate of patient satisfaction was 4.44 (95% confidence interval=4.41–4.46) on a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 indicates high satisfaction and 1 indicates high dissatisfaction. Additional data were summarized in tables and critically appraised. Limitations Nonrespondent bias from individual studies may affect the accuracy and representativeness of these data. Conclusion Patients are highly satisfied with musculoskeletal physical therapy care delivered across outpatient settings in northern Europe, North America, the United Kingdom, and Ireland. The interpersonal attributes of the therapist and the process of care are key determinants of patient satisfaction. An unexpected finding was that treatment outcome was infrequently and inconsistently associated with patient satisfaction. Physical therapists can enhance the quality of patient-centered care by understanding and optimizing these determinants of patient satisfaction.

2016 ◽  
Vol 96 (5) ◽  
pp. 609-622 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary O'Keeffe ◽  
Paul Cullinane ◽  
John Hurley ◽  
Irene Leahy ◽  
Samantha Bunzli ◽  
...  

Background Musculoskeletal physical therapy involves both specific and nonspecific effects. Nonspecific variables associated with the patient, therapist, and setting may influence clinical outcomes. Recent quantitative research has shown that nonspecific factors, including patient-therapist interactions, can influence treatment outcomes. It remains unclear, however, what factors influence patient-therapist interaction. Purpose This qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis investigated patients' and physical therapists' perceptions of factors that influence patient-therapist interactions. Data Sources Eleven databases were searched independently. Study Selection Qualitative studies examining physical therapists' and patients' perceptions of factors that influence patient-therapist interactions in musculoskeletal settings were included. Data Extraction Two reviewers independently selected articles, assessed methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP), and performed the 3 stages of analysis: extraction of findings, grouping of findings (codes), and abstraction of findings. Data Synthesis Thirteen studies were included. Four themes were perceived to influence patient-therapist interactions: (1) physical therapist interpersonal and communication skills (ie, presence of skills such as listening, encouragement, confidence, being empathetic and friendly, and nonverbal communication), (2) physical therapist practical skills (ie, physical therapist expertise and level of training, although the ability to provide good education was considered as important only by patients), (3) individualized patient-centered care (ie, individualizing the treatment to the patient and taking patient's opinions into account), and (4) organizational and environmental factors (ie, time and flexibility with care and appointments). Limitations Only studies published in English were included. Conclusions A mix of interpersonal, clinical, and organizational factors are perceived to influence patient-therapist interactions, although research is needed to identify which of these factors actually influence patient-therapist interactions. Physical therapists' awareness of these factors could enhance patient interactions and treatment outcomes. Mechanisms to best enhance these factors in clinical practice warrant further study.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 5-13
Author(s):  
Joel Rey Acob

Background and Aims: Patient satisfaction is acknowledged as the corner stone of quality management and it is the paramount of any quality management program in health care system. This study is aimed to conduct an up-to-date systematic review on different validated tools that provide quantification of patient satisfaction in out-patient physical therapy services. Type: Systematic review Literature survey: An extensive literature search was performed using 3 electronic database systems (Google scholar, PubMed, and PEDro) for articles published between 2000 and 2020. Boolean operator AND was used in compilation with the exhaustive list of search terminologies. A total of 19 studies that investigated any patient satisfaction tool in outpatient physiotherapy settings were included. Methodology: The process of data extraction was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines (2009). Results: Consensus based standards for the selection of health status measurement instruments (COSMIN) scoring quantified psychometric property of each study as excellent, good, and fair. 8 studies reflected fair scoring of Cronbach alpha, 3 studies showed excellent whereas, 2 appeared to be poor. Conclusion: The COSMIN scoring quantified multiple patient satisfaction tools. However, no gold standard was found. Nevertheless, physiotherapists working in out-patient care can increase the efficiency of patient-centered treatment by identifying and maximizing these patient satisfaction tool determinants.


2017 ◽  
Vol 51 (10) ◽  
pp. 866-889 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire R. Rodrigues ◽  
Amanda R. Harrington ◽  
Nicole Murdock ◽  
John T. Holmes ◽  
Eliza Z. Borzadek ◽  
...  

Objective: To describe pharmacy-supported transition-of-care (TOC) interventions and determine their effect on 30-day all-cause readmissions. Data Sources: MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, ABI Inform Complete, PsychINFO, Web of Science, Academic Search Complete, CINHAL, Cochrane library, OIASTER, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, ClinicalTrials.gov , and relevant websites were searched from January 1, 1995, to December 31, 2015. Study Selection and Data Extraction: PICOS+E criteria were utilized. Eligible studies reported pharmacy-supported TOC interventions compared with usual care in adult patients discharged to home within the United States. Studies were required to evaluate postdischarge outcomes (eg, rate of readmissions, hospital utilization). Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, or controlled before-and-after studies were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and evaluated study quality. Data Synthesis: A total of 56 articles were included in the systematic review (n = 61 858), of which 32 reported 30-day all-cause readmissions and were included in the meta-analysis. A taxonomy was developed to categorize targeted patients, intervention types, and pharmacy personnel as sole intervener. The meta-analysis demonstrated about a 32% reduction in the odds of readmission (odds ratio [OR] = 0.68; 95% CI = 0.61 to 0.75) observed for pharmacy-supported TOC interventions compared with usual care. Heterogeneity was identified ( I2 = 55%; P < 0.001). A stratified meta-analysis showed that interventions with patient-centered follow-up reduced 30-day readmissions relative to studies without follow-up (OR = 0.70; CI = 0.63 to 0.78). Conclusions: Pharmacy-supported TOC programs were associated with a significant reduction in the odds of 30-day readmissions.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e047283
Author(s):  
Rosalind Gittins ◽  
Louise Missen ◽  
Ian Maidment

IntroductionThere is a growing concern about the misuse of over the counter (OTC) and prescription only medication (POM) because of the impact on physical and mental health, drug interactions, overdoses and drug-related deaths. These medicines include opioid analgesics, anxiolytics such as pregabalin and diazepam and antidepressants. This protocol outlines how a systematic review will be undertaken (during June 2021), which aims to examine the literature on the pattern of OTC and POM misuse among adults who are accessing substance misuse treatment services. It will include the types of medication being taken, prevalence and demographic characteristics of people who access treatment services.Methods and analysisAn electronic search will be conducted on the Cochrane, OVID Medline, Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science databases as well as grey literature. Two independent reviewers will conduct the initial title and abstract screenings, using predetermined criteria for inclusion and exclusion. If selected for inclusion, full-text data extraction will be conducted using a pilot-tested data extraction form. A third reviewer will resolve disagreements if consensus cannot be reached. Quality and risk of bias assessment will be conducted for all included studies. A qualitative synthesis and summary of the data will be provided. If possible, a meta-analysis with heterogeneity calculation will be conducted; otherwise, Synthesis Without Meta-analysis will be undertaken for quantitative data. The reporting of this protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Findings will be peer reviewed, published and shared verbally, electronically and in print, with interested clinicians and policymakers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020135216.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e040997
Author(s):  
Varo Kirthi ◽  
Paul Nderitu ◽  
Uazman Alam ◽  
Jennifer Evans ◽  
Sarah Nevitt ◽  
...  

IntroductionThere is growing evidence of a higher than expected prevalence of retinopathy in prediabetes. This paper presents the protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis of retinopathy in prediabetes. The aim of the review is to estimate the prevalence of retinopathy in prediabetes and to summarise the current data.Methods and analysisThis protocol is developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. A comprehensive electronic bibliographic search will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library. Eligible studies will report prevalence data for retinopathy on fundus photography in adults with prediabetes. No time restrictions will be placed on the date of publication. Screening for eligible studies and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers independently, using predefined inclusion criteria and prepiloted data extraction forms. Disagreements between the reviewers will be resolved by discussion, and if required, a third (senior) reviewer will arbitrate.The primary outcome is the prevalence of any standard features of diabetic retinopathy (DR) on fundus photography, as per International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (ICDRSS) classification. Secondary outcomes are the prevalence of (1) any retinal microvascular abnormalities on fundus photography that are not standard features of DR as per ICDRSS classification and (2) any macular microvascular abnormalities on fundus photography, including but not limited to the presence of macular exudates, microaneurysms and haemorrhages. Risk of bias for included studies will be assessed using a validated risk of bias tool for prevalence studies. Pooled estimates for the prespecified outcomes of interest will be calculated using random effects meta-analytic techniques. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the I2 statistic.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required as this is a protocol for a systematic review and no primary data are to be collected. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international meetings including Diabetes UK, European Association for the Study of Diabetes, American Diabetes Association and International Diabetes Federation conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020184820.


Author(s):  
Antonio Jose Martin-Perez ◽  
María Fernández-González ◽  
Paula Postigo-Martin ◽  
Marc Sampedro Pilegaard ◽  
Carolina Fernández-Lao ◽  
...  

There is no systematic review that has identified existing studies evaluating the pharmacological and non-pharmacological intervention for pain management in patients with bone metastasis. To fill this gap in the literature, this systematic review with meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness of different antalgic therapies (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) in the improvement of pain of these patients. To this end, this protocol has been written according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020135762). A systematic search will be carried out in four international databases: Medline (Via PubMed), Web of Science, Cochrane Library and SCOPUS, to select the randomized controlled clinical trials. The Risk of Bias Tool developed by Cochrane will be used to assess the risk of bias and the quality of the identified studies. A narrative synthesis will be used to describe and compare the studies, and after the data extraction, random effects model and a subgroup analyses will be performed according to the type of intervention, if possible. This protocol aims to generate a systematic review that compiles and synthesizes the best and most recent evidence on the treatment of pain derived from vertebral metastasis.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e047439
Author(s):  
Rayan Jafnan Alharbi ◽  
Virginia Lewis ◽  
Sumina Shrestha ◽  
Charne Miller

IntroductionThe introduction of trauma systems that began in the 1970s resulted in improved trauma care and a decreased rate of morbidity and mortality of trauma patients. Worldwide, little is known about the effectiveness of trauma care system at different stages of development, from establishing a trauma centre, to implementing a trauma system and as trauma systems mature. The objective of this study is to extract and analyse data from research that evaluates mortality rates according to different stages of trauma system development globally.Methods and analysisThe proposed review will comply with the checklist of the ‘Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis’. In this review, only peer-reviewed articles written in English, human-related studies and published between January 2000 and December 2020 will be included. Articles will be retrieved from MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL. Additional articles will be identified from other sources such as references of included articles and author lists. Two independent authors will assess the eligibility of studies as well as critically appraise and assess the methodological quality of all included studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias for Non-randomised Studies of Interventions tool. Two independent authors will extract the data to minimise errors and bias during the process of data extraction using an extraction tool developed by the authors. For analysis calculation, effect sizes will be expressed as risk ratios or ORs for dichotomous data or weighted (or standardised) mean differences and 95% CIs for continuous data in this systematic review.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review will use secondary data only, therefore, research ethics approval is not required. The results from this study will be submitted to a peer-review journal for publication and we will present our findings at national and international conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019142842.


2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdou Fatawou Modiyinji ◽  
Jean Joel Bigna ◽  
Sebastien Kenmoe ◽  
Fredy Brice N. Simo ◽  
Marie A. Amougou ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a major cause of acute hepatitis in humans worldwide and have high burden in the resource-limited countries. Better knowledge of the epidemiology of hepatitis in animals in Africa can help to understand the epidemiology among humans. The objective of this study was to summarize the prevalence of HEV infection and distribution of HEV genotypes among animals in Africa. Methods In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we comprehensively searched PubMed, EMBASE, African Journals Online, and Africa Index Medicus from January 1st, 2000 to March 22th, 2020 without any language restriction. We considered cross-sectional studies of HEV infection in animals in Africa. Study selection, data extraction, and methodological quality of included studies were done independently by two investigators. Prevalence data were pooled using the random-effects meta-analysis. This review was registered in PROSPERO, CRD42018087684. Results Twenty-five studies (13 species and 6983 animals) were included. The prevalence (antibodies or ribonucleic acid [RNA]) of HEV infection in animals varied widely depending on biological markers of HEV infection measured: 23.4% (95% confidence interval; 12.0–37.2) for anti-HEV immunoglobulins G, 13.1% (3.1–28.3) for anti-HEV immunoglobulins M, and 1.8% (0.2–4.3) for RNA; with substantial heterogeneity. In subgroup analysis, the immunoglobulins G seroprevalence was higher among pigs 37.8% (13.9–65.4). The following HEV genotypes were reported in animals: Rat-HEV genotype 1 (rats and horses), HEV-3 (pigs), HEV-7 (dromedaries), and Bat hepeviruses (bats). Conclusions We found a high prevalence of HEV infection in animals in Africa and HEV genotypes close to that of humans. Some animals in Africa could be the reservoir of HEV, highlighting the need of molecular epidemiological studies for investigating zoonotic transmission.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Melina von Wernsdorff ◽  
Martin Loef ◽  
Brunna Tuschen-Caffier ◽  
Stefan Schmidt

AbstractOpen-label placebos (OLPs) are placebos without deception in the sense that patients know that they are receiving a placebo. The objective of our study is to systematically review and analyze the effect of OLPs in comparison to no treatment in clinical trials. A systematic literature search was carried out in February 2020. Randomized controlled trials of any medical condition or mental disorder comparing OLPs to no treatment were included. Data extraction and risk of bias rating were independently assessed. 1246 records were screened and thirteen studies were included into the systematic review. Eleven trials were eligible for meta-analysis. These trials assessed effects of OLPs on back pain, cancer-related fatigue, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, allergic rhinitis, major depression, irritable bowel syndrome and menopausal hot flushes. Risk of bias was moderate among all studies. We found a significant overall effect (standardized mean difference = 0.72, 95% Cl 0.39–1.05, p < 0.0001, I2 = 76%) of OLP. Thus, OLPs appear to be a promising treatment in different conditions but the respective research is in its infancy. More research is needed, especially with respect to different medical and mental disorders and instructions accompanying the OLP administration as well as the role of expectations and mindsets.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document