Background: Telehealth services have helped enable continuity of care during the coronavirus pandemic. We aimed to investigate use and views towards telehealth among allied health clinicians treating people with musculoskeletal conditions during the pandemic. Methods: Cross-sectional international survey of allied health clinicians who used telehealth to manage musculoskeletal conditions during the coronavirus pandemic. Questions covered demographics, clinician-related factors (e.g. profession, clinical experience and setting), telehealth use (e.g. proportion of caseload, treatments used), attitudes towards telehealth (Likert scale), and perceived barriers and enablers (open questions). Data were presented descriptively, and an inductive thematic content analysis approach was used for qualitative data, based on the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation Behavioural Model. Results: 827 clinicians participated, mostly physiotherapists (82%) working in Australia (70%). Most (71%, 587/ 827) reported reduced revenue (mean (SD) 62% (24.7%)) since the pandemic commenced. Median proportion of people seen via telehealth increased from 0% pre (IQR 0 to 1) to 60% during the pandemic (IQR 10 to 100). Most clinicians reported managing common musculoskeletal conditions via telehealth. Less than half (42%) of clinicians surveyed believed telehealth was as effective as face-to-face care. A quarter or less believed patients value telehealth to the same extent (25%), or that they have sufficient telehealth training (21%). Lack of physical contact when working through telehealth was perceived to hamper accurate and effective diagnosis and management. Conclusion:Although telehealth was adopted by allied health clinicians during the coronavirus pandemic, we identified barriers that may limit continued telehealth use among allied health clinicians beyond the current pandemic.
Research evidence is required to guide optimal allied health practice and inform policymakers in primary health care. Factors that influence a positive research culture are not fully understood, and nor is the impact of a positive research culture on allied health professionals. The aim of this systematic review was to identify factors that affect allied health research culture and capacity. An extensive search of 11 databases was conducted in June 2015. Studies were included if they were published in English, had full-text availability and reported research findings relating to allied health professions. Study quality was evaluated using the McMaster Critical Review Forms. Fifteen studies were eligible for inclusion. A meta-analysis was not performed because of heterogeneity between studies. Allied health professionals perceive that their individual research skills are lower in comparison to their teams and organisation. Motivators for conducting research for allied health professionals include developing skills, increasing job satisfaction and career advancement. Barriers include a lack of time, limited research skills and other work roles taking priority. Multilayered strategies, such as collaborations with external partners and developing research leadership positions, aimed at addressing barriers and enablers, are important to enhance allied health research culture and capacity.
BackgroundFlexible flat foot is a normal observation in typically developing children, however, some children with flat feet present with pain and impaired lower limb function. The challenge for health professionals is to identify when foot posture is outside of expected findings and may warrant intervention. Diagnoses of flexible flat foot is often based on radiographic or clinical measures, yet the validity and reliability of these measures for a paediatric population is not clearly understood. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate how paediatric foot posture is defined and measured within the literature, and if the psychometric properties of these measures support any given diagnoses.MethodsElectronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane, AMED, SportDiscus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science) were systematically searched in January 2017 for empirical studies where participants had diagnosed flexible flat foot and were aged 18 years or younger. Outcomes of interest were the foot posture measures and definitions used. Further articles were sought where cited in relation to the psychometric properties of the measures used.ResultsOf the 1101 unique records identified by the searches, 27 studies met the inclusion criteria involving 20 foot posture measures and 40 definitions of paediatric flexible flat foot. A further 18 citations were sought in relation to the psychometric properties of these measures. Three measures were deemed valid and reliable, the FPI-6 > + 6 for children aged three to 15 years, a Staheli arch index of > 1.07 for children aged three to six and ≥ 1.28 for children six to nine, and a Chippaux-Smirak index of > 62.7% in three to seven year olds, > 59% in six to nine year olds and ≥ 40% for children aged nine to 16 years. No further measures were found to be valid for the paediatric population.ConclusionNo universally accepted criteria for diagnosing paediatric flat foot was found within existing literature, and psychometric data for foot posture measures and definitions used was limited. The outcomes of this review indicate that the FPI – 6, Staheli arch index or Chippaux-Smirak index should be the preferred method of paediatric foot posture measurement in future research.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13047-018-0264-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
SP-based education is widely accepted as a valuable and effective means of teaching communication skills but there is limited evidence of how this translates to patient outcomes and no indication of economic benefit for this type of training over another method.
The allied health workforce identifies as a group that is ready to build the evidence to support clinical practice yet requires a whole-systems approach to do so. The results of the present study suggest that the development of key people to build capacity at a higher organisational level has a flow-down effect on research capacity and culture.
BackgroundClinical supervision is recommended for allied health professionals for the purpose of supporting them in their professional role, continued professional development and ensuring patient safety and high quality care. The aim of this mixed methods study was to explore allied health professionals’ perceptions about the aspects of clinical supervision that can facilitate effective clinical supervision.MethodsIndividual semi-structured interviews were conducted on a purposive sample of 38 allied health professionals working in a metropolitan public hospital. Qualitative analysis was completed using an interpretive description approach. To enable triangulation of qualitative data, a quantitative descriptive survey of clinical supervision effectiveness was also conducted using the Manchester Clinical Supervision Scale (MCSS-26).ResultsThree main themes emerged from qualitative analysis: Allied health professionals reported that clinical supervision was most effective when their professional development was the focus of clinical supervision; the supervisor possessed the skills and attributes required to facilitate a constructive supervisory relationship; and the organisation provided an environment that facilitated this relationship together with their own professional development. Three subthemes also emerged within each of the main themes: the importance of the supervisory relationship; prioritisation of clinical supervision relative to other professional duties; and flexibility of supervision models, processes and approaches to clinical supervision. The mean MCSS-26 score was 79.2 (95%CI 73.7 to 84.3) with scores ranging from 44 to 100. MCSS-26 results converged with the qualitative findings with participants reporting an overall positive experience with clinical supervision.ConclusionsThe factors identified by allied health professionals that influenced the effectiveness of their clinical supervision were mostly consistent among the professions. However, allied health professionals reported using models of clinical supervision that best suited their profession’s role and learning style. This highlighted the need for flexible approaches to allied health clinical supervision that should be reflected in clinical supervision policies and guidelines. Many of the identified factors that influence the effectiveness of clinical supervision of allied health professionals can be influenced by health organisations.
This study aimed to investigate any differences between the motor skills and sensory processing abilities of children between the ages of 4 and 8, who do and do not have an idiopathic toe walking gait. Children in each cohort were tested with a number of norm referenced assessments. A total of 60 children participated, 30 within each cohort. Those with an idiopathic toe walking gait were found to have different Sensory Profile quadrant scores (P = .002), poorer performance on the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (P ≤ .001), a lower vibration perception threshold (P = .001), and poorer performance on the Standing Walking Balance subtest of the Sensory Integration and Praxis Test (P = .047), compared with non-toe walking peers. Although this research does not give a causative factor for toe walking gait, it provides a number of theories as to why this gait may not be idiopathic in nature.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.