Attitudes, knowledge and behavior of Japanese physical therapists with regard to evidence-based practice and clinical practice guidelines: a cross-sectional mail survey

Abstract

[Purpose] This study aimed to investigate Japanese physical therapists’ attitudes of evidence-based practice and clinical practice guidelines. [Subjects and Methods] In 2014, a cross-sectional postal mail survey using a self-administered questionnaire was conducted. Of 2,982 physical therapists belonging to the Chiba Prefecture Physical Therapist Association, 1,000 were randomly selected. The questionnaire comprised 42 items pertaining to the attitudes of and behavior toward evidence-based practice and clinical practice guidelines. It was investigated to reveal the relationship between clinical practice guidelines/evidence-based practice and therapist characteristics. [Results] The response rate was 39.6%, and 384 questionnaires were available. The main results were as follows: 83.3% participants agreed to the importance of evidence-based practice, 77.1% agree to that evidence-based practice supports clinical decision of physical therapists, and about 11% agreed to have been educated about evidence-based practice. Then, 29.2% used, 54.9% agreed to the importance of, and 13.3% agreed to the utility of clinical practice guidelines. An important factor related mostly to a positive attitude, knowledge and behavior of evidence-based practice and clinical practice guidelines was participating in research activities. [Conclusion] Many of physical therapists do not use and understand the importance of clinical practice guidelines. Participating in research activities may partially contribute to improving these conditions.

The Effect of Education on Clinical Practice Guidelines with Shared Decision Making: A Randomized Controlled trial

“…Contrastingly, it is reported that the consciousness of Japanese therapists on CPGs and the evidence are low compared to foreign countries. Fujimoto et al [27] researched the consciousness of EBP while targeting Japanese physiotherapists. Although 54.9% perceived the signi cance of CPGs, the usage was below 30% [27], which is way below the 61% usage in foreign countries [28].…”

“…One reason for this could be the lack of therapist education on the usage of CPGs in Japan [27]. In particular, perspectives on applicable situations lack in practical education in Japan [34].…”

“…The EPIC scale is a self-administered questionnaire that evaluates the degree of self-e cacy at 11 levels. For the secondary outcome, an examination of the knowledge of EBP [27][28][29][30] was conducted (Table S2). The knowledge of the EBP was evaluated using a questionnaire survey composed of 15 items on attitudes toward EBP, EBP education, and EBP-associated behaviors.…”

“…From the preceding study, the following were recruited as confounding factors: age [10,11], sex, academic history [31] , years of experience [10], acquirement of certi ed physio/occupational therapist [12], principal disease stage of the hospital employed (acute phase, recovery phase, chronic phase) [10,11], mainly responsible disorder (orthopedic disease, developmental disorder, sports injury, spinal cord injury, post-amputation, psychiatric disorder, neuromuscular disorder, cerebrovascular disease, respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, and other) [10,11], weekly duty hours [10,11], number of therapists at the hospital employed [10,11], number of hospital beds at the hospital employed [32], number of responsible patients in a day [10,11], and participation in research activities [12]. The factors above were inquired through a self-administered questionnaire.…”

“…In EBP education, the knowledge of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is thought to increase the self-e cacy of EBP [7][8][9]. Moreover, the relevance of the knowledge/attitude of CPGs and self-e cacy in EBP is reported frequently [10][11][12]. A CPG is de ned as: "…a document that presents appropriate recommendations to assist patients and practitioners in making rescissions regarding clinical practice of high importance based on the body of evidence evaluated and integrated by systematic reviews and the balance between bene ts and harms [13]."…”