Are patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) useful in low back pain? Experiences of physiotherapists in primary health care in Sweden

Rasmussen-Barr, Eva; Lindqvist, Cecilia; Östhols, Sara; Boström, Carina

doi:10.1016/j.msksp.2021.102414

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of our study showed that there was no significant association between Egyptian physical therapist gender and the utilization pattern of functional outcome measures and scales. The results of our study also showed that physiotherapists with doctoral and master's degrees had a lower frequency of (always/often) using QBPDS and RMDQ, as well as they had a higher frequency of (rarely/never) using BPFS compared with physiotherapists with a master, DPT, diploma, and bachelor's degree also, there was no significant association between educational level with the use of ODQ, PSFS, PDI, and SF-36, which is consistent with other studies which did not observe any pattern between educational degree and using outcome measures in dealing with low back pain [21]. Other studies reported that the respondents with the highest professional degree had no significant effect on whether outcome measures were adopted or not in their practice in Egypt [17].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Physiotherapists have already identified some of the barriers to adopting outcome measures. For example, language and cultural barriers, the degree of organizational support received in their practice, [15] the patient's difficulty in understanding the outcome measures, [22] lack of clear guidance about the suitability of available outcome measures, lack of appropriate outcome measure, [11] lack of time and knowledge, [14] and lack of a routine for using outcome measures also was an identified barrier [21]. This highlights a need for professional training on the use of standardized outcome measures related to LBP [18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Functional scales used by the Egyptian physiotherapist in the assessment of low back pain: a cross-sectional study

Elhafez

Sweed²,

Ibrahim

2023

Bull Fac Phys Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The use of functional scales is crucial for the management of low back pain. Numerous pertinent outcome measures are available; however, it is unknown how much use Egyptian physiotherapists make of these scales and measurements when diagnosing and treating patients with low back pain. Aim The purpose of this study was to investigate how Egyptian physical therapists working in Egypt used functional outcome measures and scales when treating low back pain. Design and methods A cross-section study used an online web-based survey which was accessible to all Egyptian physiotherapists practicing in Egypt. Results 334 Egyptian physical therapists participated in this study. The use of the pain disability index and back pain functional scale represents the highest frequency of (always/often) of 56.3% and 53.6% respectively, whereas the use of the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale or the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire represents the highest frequency of (rarely/never) 45.8% and 53%, respectively. There was no significant association between gender, years of experience, educational level, and work setting with the use of functional outcome measures (p > 0.05). Conclusion Egyptian physiotherapists more usually utilize the pain disability index and back pain functional scale (PDI and BPFS), when evaluating their patients with low back pain, although they did not commonly use the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire or the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional scales used by the Egyptian physiotherapist in the assessment of low back pain: a cross-sectional study

Elhafez

Sweed²,

Ibrahim

2023

Bull Fac Phys Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, according to our current understanding, neither is considered an ideal measuring tool [10,12]. Furthermore, besides selecting the right PROM, one must also remove barriers that hinder the usage of the instrument, such as providing adequate time, convincing participants that PROMs are helpful, and having the necessary routines or competencies [13].…”

Section: Can a Generic Patient Reported Outcome Measure Substitute A ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Can a generic patient reported outcome measure substitute a condition specific measure at assessing care effectiveness in low back pain?

Mihalicza,

Dombrádi,

Belicza

et al. 2023

IME

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality of care assessments beside the provider level should also include the patient perspective, however, there aren't widespread solutions for this approach. One possibility is to apply a generic, thus, widely applicable Patient Reported Outcomes Measure (PROM) to assess care outcomes. Taking this notion into consideration, this study aimed to investigate if a generic questionnaire can reliably substitute a disease-specific questionnaire when measuring care effectiveness with patient-reported outcome measures among patients with low back pain. Between January and December 2019, we conducted a before and after survey in three Hungarian hospitals. Adults with confirmed low back pain expecting spinal surgery were eligible to enter the study. SF-36 Health Survey (SF-36) and Roland‐Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) were used. Multivariate linear regression analyses were conducted to explore the relationship between the results of the two questionnaires and how service provider, sex, and education level could explain the differences in the calculated PROM-based performance measures. During the pre-intervention survey, 11 individuals decided to either not sign the consent form or complete the questionnaire. As a result, 116 individuals participated in the first – baseline – survey and 86 in the second – follow-up – survey. The drop-out rate varied by providers: the lowest rate was 15%, and the highest 39%. Of the SF-36 subscale-based performance measures, role limitations due to physical health and physical functioning significantly correlated with the RMDQ performance measure. Considering the necessary minimum clinically important difference, the explanatory analysis showed that the SF-36 physical functioning subscale-based and the RMDQ-based performance measures established the same performance rank-order among the participating hospitals. The physical functioning subscale of the SF-36 provided similar results to the RMDQ regarding care effectiveness. Thus, the SF-36 may be able to measure and compare care effectiveness among providers in low-back pain. If future studies investigating other health conditions come to the same conclusion, then the SF-36 could be used by itself to incorporate the patient perspective into health care quality assessments, thereby increasing comparability and lowering administrative costs.

show abstract

“…In patient-centered clinical practice, the subjective status of the patient must be understood, and a patientreported outcome measure (PROM) is needed. The integration of PROM facilitates patient engagement in their treatment [1]. A semistructured PROM wherein patients rate the importance of structured items and the magnitude of the psychometric properties to be investigated (e.g., disability and satisfaction) is considered a feasible and promising patient-centered PROM [2], and some have been developed recently [3][4][5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Confirmation of the Unidimensionality of the Satisfaction and Recovery Index Among Those With Various Musculoskeletal Disorders

Takasaki,

Ishida

2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background A semistructured patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) wherein patients rate the importance of structured items and the magnitude of the psychometric properties to be investigated (e.g., disability and satisfaction) facilitates patient engagement in their treatment and patient-centered clinical practice. The Satisfaction and Recovery Index (SRI) is one such semistructured PROM that was originally developed to measure recovery from a whiplash injury. Exploratory factor analysis demonstrated a one-factor structure among ambulatory community-dwelling people with traumatic musculoskeletal injuries. However, a confirmatory factor analysis has not been conducted among patients with various musculoskeletal disorders, and the internal structure of the SRI has not been established yet. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the internal structure of the SRI among patients with diverse musculoskeletal disorders. Methodology An anonymous survey was performed for patients who were referred for physical therapy for musculoskeletal disorders at a local orthopedic clinic. A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted. The goodness-of-fit criteria were as follows: chi-square/degree of freedom < 3, goodness-of-fit index > 0.90, adjusted goodness-of-fit index > 0.95, and root mean square error of approximation < 0.08. Results Data from 217 participants were analyzed. All goodness-of-fit criteria were satisfied. Conclusion This study confirmed the acceptable internal structure of the SRI among patients with diverse musculoskeletal disorders.

show abstract

Are patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) useful in low back pain? Experiences of physiotherapists in primary health care in Sweden

Cited by 10 publications

References 39 publications

Functional scales used by the Egyptian physiotherapist in the assessment of low back pain: a cross-sectional study

Functional scales used by the Egyptian physiotherapist in the assessment of low back pain: a cross-sectional study

Can a generic patient reported outcome measure substitute a condition specific measure at assessing care effectiveness in low back pain?

Confirmation of the Unidimensionality of the Satisfaction and Recovery Index Among Those With Various Musculoskeletal Disorders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About